Removing Piercings At Airport Terminals

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

BTW Marc... the woman was not the only person there. I would love to read the transcript of interviews of all witnesses.

[Msterbeau]

BTW Marc... the woman was not the only person there. I would love to read the transcript of interviews of all witnesses.

I agree on that. I'm assuming the TSA would rather the public not be able to scrutinize those statements.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Or her Lawer.

[Msterbeau]

OK... So when I raced cars, reading rules and interpreting them became an art form for me. The TSA's rule doesn't seem all that vague to me, nor does sound any different then what they say their changing it to.

Old rule:

"Hidden items such as body piercings may result in your being directed to additional screening for a pat-down inspection. If selected for additional screening, you may ask to remove your body piercing in private as an alternative to the pat-down search."

It says if you have hidden metal that they detect, you MAY be directed to additional screening in the form of a pat down. So they might take you aside. They might not. Their discretion. And the only mentioned method they list is a pat down. The next part says that if you are chosen YOU, THE PASSENGER, may ask to remove your jewelry, in place of the pat down.

Now... We don't yet have the official wording but here's what the TSA statement says they will change:

"In the future passengers can either allow a visual inspection of their piercings, or remove them, the agency said.

Basically the same thing except with "pat down" replaced by visual inspection. Not quite the same thing but the gist of it is. THE PASSENGER GETS TO MAKE THE CALL on what happens next.

I think it's fair to say that in either case, the passenger was not given the choice to remove the jewelry. The TSA is not disputing the woman's statements so it's hard to think they disagree.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

You seem to forget the forgotten option that is unwritten. You can leave by the door you came in. There is nothing that says they have to let you fly.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

If she wasn;t given the choice to remopve the jewlery... why is she complaining that it hurt to remove it? Why did she borrow a pair of plyers? Why did she tell the officers that she could not remove it without pain?

[odims_sphere]

You seem to forget the forgotten option that is unwritten. You can leave by the door you came in. There is nothing that says they have to let you fly.

That or the option to not wear metal through a metal detector and bypass all the hassle completely.

[TygerLili]

BTW Marc... the woman was not the only person there. I would love to read the transcript of interviews of all witnesses.

I agree, and that's why I'm staying neutral on this. I don't feel like I have enough info to make an informed decision here. It's really one person's word against another's.

[Destroit]

Not to derail the thread, but as American citizens, it is kinda our right to dictate to those providing the safety, in at least a general sense, how it is to be provided. We choose, as a people, to abide by the Geneva conventions (at least ostensibly), and to attempt to conduct ourselves in a humane and decent manner. We frown on unnecessary civilian casualties. We protest and vote out incumbents when we dislike how they shape military and governmental policy. At least in theory.

As for the TSA officers who you claim deserve our respect and cooperation, I have to be honest...they get fuck-all for respect from me.

Soldiers and police officers train for the possibility of putting their lives on the line, in one form or another, to help preserve the public safety and the public well-being. They get a certain measure of respect right off the bat. Those minimum-wage morons (yes, they are, I've traveled enough to see them, at least at Detroit, Green Bay, Chicago, and Greenville, SC) who dictate who can and cannot go through their little security gates have to earn my respect, just like every other schmoe.

Yes, my evidence is anecdotal, I understand that.

That's very true, they're not cops. Fuck, they might be slimy ass jerk-offs or rent-a-cops looking for a new "career". I'll pay respect to my fire fighters, cops, soldiers, and people in those sorts of positions, but being a TSA security guard? That's like holding mall security in high regards.

[freydis]

So in short those "assholes" and "asshats" followed procedures, and never violated their own policy as was discussed earlier.

Yes, Odims, when someone laughs at another's pain within their earshot, im *still* going to call them an asshat.

I was commenting on their behaviour. You can enforce a policy without being a juvenile tool. Snickering as someone removes piercings with garden variety pliers falls under "asshat" in my book.

[jadnifer]

I agree... I think they should be consistant.... it either all comes off, or not... No one should get a free pass because of faith. I mean if someone is wearing something because of family, politics, fashion, etc... it would come off, why does religion get special treatment? And if that's true why not just claim that nip piercings are religious?

I don't think that the rules should be different for a shiek wearing a turban. He could be hiding something in there. Why would we just let him through like everything is cool. What if I was wearing a piece of metal jewelry that had a LOT of religious significance to me? They would make me take it off. There is really no difference in the two. I would say not making the guy take off his turban would be more dangerous. I'm not racist by any means, that's just logical. It's hard to hide something in a crucifix necklace.

Wow. I just got a chance to completely read through this. I have mixed feelings about this situation.

All right, the woman should have known that metal probably would have set the alarms off. However, nipple rings are hard to take out. The fact that they asked her to take them out and she needed pliers to do so, wouldn't that tip them off to the fact that she probably wasn't concealing anything. But then again, she could have been so maybe I am just confusing myself here. The guards should NOT have laughed at her whatsoever. It's not the fact that they are underpaid guards. That's just a human thing. You should not laugh at other people's pain.

Now, when she removed this other piercing, that causes a hole, does it not? She was probably bleeding wouldn't she be? Or were the pliers used to unscrew the barbell? Either way, I'm sure that it was painful.

I have no doubt that there should be a rule in place for these sorts of things, but they need to be clear and consistent and not be different for the people that they choose it to be different for.