Yes, the key of alarm resolution is to identify dangerous objects, which means a TSO has to identify all alarms. We can see zipper tabs, we can pat down a hip or knee implant to clear that alarm, we can clear underwire in a bra. Unfortunately in this situation, a visual inspection was not an option for the TSO. Yes, it would have been far more easier to have the lady flash her boobs and be on her way, but that would have been outside of the SOP. If she did flash her boobs and go, and then hired a lawyer to sue the TSA because she had to flash her boobs....
All of the articles indicated that the woman cleared the WTMD with
no alarm and then the jewelry alarmed the HHMD. If someone didn't alarm the WTMD, what was the HHMD being used for anyway? If someone doesn't alarm the WTMD, that non-invasive device has already determined to the TSA's satisfaction that they aren't carrying a metal weapon (otherwise, everyone would get the HHMD).
I really don't see why common sense couldn't have been applied to let her go in this case. I'm 100% sure she wasn't the first woman to pass a TSA checkpoint with steel nipple jewelry.
My guess is that the screener pressed the HHMD up against her boobs trying to generate an alarm as part of a power trip, harassment, lewd behavior, or something similar. IMO the HHMD is ripe for abuse, because it is so easy to make it seem to "alarm" by touching something or holding it ultra close. The HHMD can also be made to alarm on my pants zipper, but TSA doesn't make me drop my pants to prove there's nothing metal behind the zipper.
Making her remove the jewelry was philosophically wrong, but I fear that giving pax the "option" to show their private areas to resolve alarms is another step toward mandated TSA strip searches to resolve alarms.
I can see it now, anyone with an alarming metal implant under the age of 50 is subjected to mandatory strip search to maintain the "privilege" of flying commercial. Anything for security, right?
