Originally Posted by tanja (Post 16621941)

And again , what if it is a piercing in the genital area or on the breasts?

How is that supposed to be cleared?

Since they cant ask you to take of your undies and bra's. It is not permitted to take these items off even if you offer to do it.

These kind of piercings cant be seen through the clothes.
So how is these piercings cleared?

Originally Posted by RichardKenner (Post 16622404)

As was discussed here a number of times, if something is obviously (by feel) a piercing, that's enough to "clear it". The only complex issue would be a very large and hard-to-remove piercing.

Originally Posted by InkUnderNails (Post 16622924)

(It is a long post, I apologize. It is a difficult question that can not be answered in a simple manner effectively.)

tanja,

In an inadvertent way you see the problem. The problem is not the the vast multitude of travelers that fit into large part of the bell curve we will call "usual" for lack of a better term. The real problem is with the outliers, those that have issues that put them outside of what is typically seen.

The only way to resolve these is on a customized, person by person basis. This process is poorly implemented by a large bureaucracy operating from a standard operating procedure manual. If there is not a Paragraph X Subsection Y for a particular instance or anomaly the system grinds to a halt, people make things up on the fly, and the system becomes dysfunctional. Most of the really stupid-sounding stuff we see here fits this.

As a traveling public, we have three choices:

1. Conform ourselves to the standard that fits which in many cases is simply not possible.
   
2. Do not submit ourselves to the system. In other words, do not fly.
   
3. Work with the process to resolve the problems and difficulties.

Most of the difficult to clear people would happily accept the third category if the system would only allow it. tanja, I have read here on many occasions that you would be willing to go outside of procedure to allow a reasonable resolution. The person up thread with the ostomy is similar. The solution is simple to state and nearly impossible to implement because it requires compassion, intelligence and a vast number of adequately trained people, at least one available at every check point.

I am suggesting an anomaly resolution specialist. This person would be trained to talk with the passenger and explain in detail why they can not be cleared. They would have permission to use real language and not things like "resistance." They would seek solutions from the passenger.

• It is really important to us that we quickly get this completed and get you on to your plane so that you can continue with your trip, so let's figure out what we can do to get this resolved.
  
• If we could get a swab (or see) your XXXX area we might resolve this, but we are not allowed to do this. We have to have your permission or there may be some way for you to help us resolve it.
  
• We really need to see under you shirt at this particular area or find out what the screener is feeling. How do you suggest we do this?
  
• The chemical detected is XXXXX. These are usually associated with YYYYYY. Is this something that you could help us determine the source?
  
• We can rerun the swabs in multiple areas and even areas under you clothes. Would you be willing to help us with the swabs if we observe as you are doing it?
  
• We are really not interested in things that are not weapons, explosives or things that start fires. If something other than this is causing the anomaly, then you have no concerns in this process. (TSA will have to abandon its see something, say something game for non-WEI with these private resolutions. )

The solutions would have to be developed on a person by person basis, The person would need to be assured that they were not in any trouble, that the weakness is in the standard procedures, and that they are in full control of how this can be resolved. If the situation is one where the passenger is uncooperative or belligerent, of if there are other indications that the passenger may indeed be one of the rare cases of someone try to get WEI on the plane, then the dynamic changes.

I know, it will not work for many reasons, most of which I will be able to read over the next little while. I will start.

T

• his presents an almost impossible task for training and manning.
  
• They would have to abandon the non-WEI searches and notification.
  
• It requires compassion and a calm demeanor.
  
• It allows the passenger to have some control of the process.
  
• It requires that the TSA not consider everyone a threat that needs to be resolved but instead a passenger that is difficult to clear.

Originally Posted by tanja (Post 16623246)

In my opinon TSA cant just tell somebody not to fly because they cant be cleared. When there are ways to clear a pax, if the pax is willing to do it.

Originally Posted by TheGolfWidow (Post 16623424)

Bullies don't want the ball handed back to them; they want to take the ball away. Either way, the bully gets the ball from you, so why the fuss over how it gets back to them? Well, the big deal is that the ball doesn't actually matter to the bully; it's the power-trip that matters, and when you offer the ball back to them, they don't get to take their little power-trip.

So....try not to bring a ball to a playground where bullies are known to play. Stay home, make yourself an unsuitable target, or find a different playground.

If you need to fly, the best you can hope for is to manipulate the system and/or your screener to your advantage. (The self-directed opt-out is an example of this.) Women have to be particularly careful about this sort of thing, though, because sometimes women do things they think put off advances that actually attract them -- obviously the thing most of us want to do is put off any interaction with hostile screeners rather than attract it.

Originally Posted by InkUnderNails (Post 16620199)

Ask them to volunteer for the AIT, if available. If not, then that person is not cleared into the sterile area. An alarm must be resolved. If you had said a ETD, I would have suggested a follow up with known clean gloves and new swab. If it still fails, then you have no choice.

Originally Posted by nachtnebel (Post 16624132)

what about folks with hip or knee replacements, people with metal in their bodies from accidents/war etc. You are sentencing them to be goosed every time they fly. If HHMD indicates metal at expected locations for commonly done medical procedures, they get a pass. Use of passive millimeter wave that non invasively detects items external to the body would certainly be called for in these cases.

You don't need 100% assurance that the item in question is not harmful. That is an unrealistic standard and even visual and feeling the item won't yield that. People capable of risk assessment should be able to determine that this old goober is likely to have an artificial knee if the HHMD alarms in that area.

The whole debate is being skewed here, and leads right into ratifying the absolute stupidity being followed by the TSA when it does things like forcing a visual inspection of an adult diaper on an old lady in a wheelchair.

Originally Posted by SATTSO (Post 16618531)

Again, what I have been asked is this: they will not accept their bag to be screened, not by machine, not by hand. Yet they want it on the plane. What do you, as TSA, do?

Originally Posted by nachtnebel (Post 16624132)

what about folks with hip or knee replacements, people with metal in their bodies from accidents/war etc. You are sentencing them to be goosed every time they fly. If HHMD indicates metal at expected locations for commonly done medical procedures, they get a pass. Use of passive millimeter wave that non invasively detects items external to the body would certainly be called for in these cases.

You don't need 100% assurance that the item in question is not harmful. That is an unrealistic standard and even visual and feeling the item won't yield that. People capable of risk assessment should be able to determine that this old goober is likely to have an artificial knee if the HHMD alarms in that area.

The whole debate is being skewed here, and leads right into ratifying the absolute stupidity being followed by the TSA when it does things like forcing a visual inspection of an adult diaper on an old lady in a wheelchair.

Originally Posted by PTravel (Post 16624376)

Not let the bag fly. No one objects to reasonable security. The question is, what constitutes, "reasonable"? X-ray, swabbing and/or hand-inspection is (or, at least, can be) reasonable. Intrusive searches of the person and/or subjecting someone to ionizing radiation is not.

There is no such thing as, "perfect security," without massive violations of individual liberties in violation of the Constitution. The Constitution, and the liberties it secures, are more important than approaching perfect security.

Originally Posted by Bart (Post 16582843)

For the record, there is nothing in the screening SOP that warrants for anyone to remove clothing with the exception of outer wear such as sweaters, jackets, coats, etc. provided that the individual has other clothing underneath such as a blouse or similar appropriate attire.

Originally Posted by OldGoat (Post 16625195)

Bart, is there anything in the screening SOP that "warrants for anyone to remove" a Depends? That certainly isn't outerwear, and it sounds like the TSA screeners asked that it be removed.

Originally Posted by RichardKenner (Post 16625635)

I have a recollection that one of our resident TSOs said a while ago that a soiled diaper did need to be replaced with a clean one, but I can't find it at the moment.

Originally Posted by t325 (Post 16567156)

Strip searched, as in they actually made you take your clothes off? ...? I didn't think even the TSA did that - sounds like grounds for a lawsuit.