STEPHANIE TANIZAR
Assistant Perspectives Editor
On February 24, Mandi Hamlin from Texas was stopped when she tried to board her flight from Lubbock to Dallas. Though she had passed through the larger metal detector without problem, the handheld scanner held by a female Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agent beeped as it passed over Hamlin’s chest area.
TSA employees are no stranger to hold-ups and strict precautions, of course. Travel regulations have only grown more stringent in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, with good reason. It is no longer uncommon to find pamphlets decrying the carrying of liquids, aerosols, gels, and pointed or potentially dangerous objects through security checks or onboard a flight.
Hamlin’s misstep in the security check daisy chain was her metal body piercings. To be precise – a pair of nipple piercings. The TSA agent called one of her male colleagues over to remove them. Understandably, Hamlin asked to display the piercings to a female agent instead, but was told she would not be allowed to board unless her piercings were removed.
She was brought behind a curtain, where she managed to remove one piercing without undue trauma. The second piercing, however, was a ring, and difficult to remove. Hamlin was forced to ask for a pair of pliers to remove the metal ring, crying. As she worked the ring out, she could hear the male TSA agents snickering behind her.
To complicate matters further, Hamlin’s belly piercing, roughly the same size as her nipple piercings, was allowed onboard the flight without a peep of protest.
This unconscionable invasion of privacy was brought to media attention after Hamlin contacted and hired high-profile lawyer Gloria Allred to represent her case against TSA. While nipple piercings might be a slightly racy topic of discussion, few do not empathize with Hamlin’s plight – particularly given the fact that skin tends to heal around piercings, according to Allred, which was why removing her piercing proved so physically traumatic on top of the humiliation she was already enduring.
TSA has held that its agents were acting with strict adherence to official procedure, and sees no reason to fault them for doing their job.
Despite the high embarrassment factor, one might be tempted to shrug it off as an anomaly, a one-off thing – if this were, in fact, an isolated incident. However, a rash of accounts depicting overhanded behavior meted out by TSA handlers have been making the Internet grapevine.
Nicholas Monahan and his wife were expecting their first child when they were waiting to board a plane from Portland, Oregon, to Las Vegas, Nevada. Both of them were subjected to thorough security checks, according to Monahan’s story on LewRockell.com. When Monahan came out, his wife, seven and a half months pregnant, was crying. As part of procedure, her breasts had been touched by the female TSA agent, and she was asked to lift her shirt without the courtesy of a screen. Monahan began to yell at the TSA agents and was put under arrest.
Monahan was later fined $250 for causing a public fracas over TSA removal of a pair of scissors. When he later pointed out that his problem had not been because of the scissors, he was informed there was no evidence to the contrary and TSA’s word was taken over his. Video footage of the incidence was reportedly erased long before the trial.
Monica Emmerson and her 19 month-old toddler were detained because of her toddler’s sippy cup, as told to NowPublic.com. It held filtered tap water, which Emmerson offered to drink or pour away in order to keep it for the long flight from Washington to Nevada. She was informed that to do so, she would have to go through security again, which she agreed to. As she was walking back, she accidentally spilled the water because she was duly upset with the situation.
She was then detained and threatened with arrest for endangering the lives of other passengers. TSA officers ordered her to clean the water and apologize for spilling it in the first place. She was threatened with arrest several times and held for 45 minutes, ultimately missing her flight.
TSA has debunked these claims on the “Myth Busters” section of their Web site. In light of Hamlin’s humiliation, these might be cause for a little more investigation.
While the public outcry over Hamlin’s piercings have led to a reassessment of TSA’s security policies (though no outright apology to Hamlin has been made), the fact remains that TSA’s heavy-handed attention has begun to chafe many, seven years after the events of September 11.
No one doubts that airport security is an important and necessary tenet of air travel. Hamlin herself has stated that she is content with change in TSA policy despite not receiving a well-deserved apology. But TSA could stand to have its officers exercise a little patience and respect for passenger privacy.
04-03-2008
