Woman told to remove bra to enter court

security threat

Lord. An underwire bra can set off a metal detector?

And people insist that Law Enforcement isn't out of control.

I've gone through a metal detector at the airport while wearing an underwire bra, and it never set anything off. I have big titties, too.

Cops should be neutered... lol. Would solve a lot of problems.

Heh. Obviously, I'm only joking, but I would hope that the law enforcement personel in my area have more sense I'm not feeling too hopeful, by the way.

*sidesteps, waits for Elwood to come in swinging.*

I would assume not normally, however this one must have had unusually large wires. How the hell is the metal detector meant to know what is "good" and "bad" metal?

Evidentally the lady in question thinks they should have just taken her word for it that the metal detected was harmless.

We need Proof

Elwood's going to say only what needs to be said.

And I don't presume to speak for him, but I imagine it's that this country needs a big fucking helping of common sense on everyone's plate.

Common sense hey, so what you you have done in this situation?

Not have metal detectors at the court entrance?

Let her through despite setting it off, because hey she has breasts so we can't risk offending her?

Or treat everyone equally and if they set off a metal detector make sure that whatever is setting it off is safe?

Sorry guys. My husband gets sooooo cranky when I do that.

After watching him go off on Ted and others, I assume nothing.

Women have been hiding things (including weapons) in their bras for a long time now, taking advantage of the very fact that most people wouldn't dare check. It was, in my opinion, perfectly appropriate for her to have to somehow show that the metal in her bra was not a gun or a knife or something.

To those of you complaining so loudly about law enforcement officers: How would you have had her prove that the metal in her bra was harmless?

​

How would you feel if your wife... your daughter... were forced to remove their bra in public? Refused permission to even go to the bathroom and do it? And all without a privacy screen, or with a female officer present?

You'd be perfectly fine with that?

By the sounds of it there were some miscommunications here. I am going to assume that the courts bathroom was inside the secure area. So they told her she couldn't go into it, but meaning she could go elsewhere, whereas she assumed they meant it had to be done there.

Where should she go? perhaps she didn't want to be running around, braless, all over the area.

That being the case then what should they have done?

1) We've been in Europe long enough that we're pretty European about those things. My wife is European, my daughter was born and raised here, and I have pretty casual attitudes towards dressing or undressing in public. Doing something like this woman did (removing her bra underneath her blouse, with her husband holding up a coat to conceal her) is standard practice that wouldn't phase any of us.

2) Re-read the article. She was not "refused permission to even go to the bathroom to do it." They simply told her that they didn't have a bathroom she could use to do it.

​

Had both a female officer present and a privacy screen/booth where any woman, and the female officer could go.


But if you ask me it's all bullshit anyway. Put up the thick green glass between the audience and the actual court proceedings if you are worried about safety.

OH NOES INDIGNANT RAGE OVER NOTHING LOL WTF BBQ



As Async mentioned, it's pretty easy to remove a bra from under a blouse (and no, I won't demonstrate. ) and create enough privacy to do that in public. Not that I'd want to, but I'm willing to make some sacrifices in the name of safety. I'm sure I don't have to remind you all of the bombers who put explosives in a baby bottle.

Well, and I'm sorry Async, that's really pretty sad. That you would accept being forced to do this. I feel sorry for you man, you've been over there to long.

Same difference.

I find this quite amusing. People here on WF like to accuse the Christians of being prudes where any slight reference to undressing is concerned, and because I don't have a problem with it, you (who don't even pretend to be a Christian) say that "pretty sad" and "you feel sorry for me."

I guess it's not necessarily the Christians who are the prudes after all.

You're probably among those who thought the inadvertant display of a nipple on television was something awfu, too, weren't you?

​

Wrong.

But then, we have all known for a long time that reading comprehension is not your strong point, nor is being able to see the logic of the other side of a discussion, no matter how clearly it is pointed out.

Been through any good roundabouts lately?

​

No. I have no problem with nudity on tv, in print, or in person. I don't think being ok with removing a bra in public is anything to attack a person on or to scoff as sad. I think being forced to remove a bra in public for bullshit security reasons is sad, and that accepting that is sad as well. Hell I wouldn't care if the woman went topless, if she was ok with it and it was her choice. Same here. But she wasn't given a choice.

I find this display a sad example of the US's further descent into a police state. Where you hear things like "for the good of security" or "In order to remain safe" used as excuses to force shit like this.

You're smarter than that async.

Nope, I'm perfectly happy with my stop lights and jug handels.

Nice to see you stoop down to the level of personal attacks async. What's next, slinging around insults at my weight? Oh, Oh, I know. Next you'll be like Tex, CD, evenflow or Elwood and sling a Rapy or McCreepy, Tell me to eat a bullet right?

So every place with a metal detector should now have to employ both female and male security officers and have a seperate area with metal detection equipment?

If they intend to search, or strip, people of both sexes, then yes.

No, but some sort of privacy screen at the least, in the event that the person isn't comfortable doing what they have to in full public view.

If they intend to search, or strip, people of both sexes, then yes. [/QUOTE]

They didn't strip her though, they simply said that you can't go through a metal detector while setting it off unless you can show that whatever is setting it off is safe.

Hey, if you can't handle people telling you the truth about yourself (you are abysmally incapable of logical reasoning), you shouldn't get personal about other posters, by telling them you "feel sorry for them" and that their attitudes are "pretty sad."

It is obvious to anyone with any serious grounding in logic that you are not able to read things and grasp the clear implications. As you saying there is no difference between "she was not allowed to use a bathroom" and "they didn't have a bathroom for her to use" shows very clearly.

If you can't take having the blatant logical inconsistencies of your posts pointed out, then perhaps you shouldn't be debating on internet.

​

Here's what you do. You pull her aside and run the wand over her. If you get a hit on the breast area, she's pulled to the side and she waits, for however long it takes, until a female officer/deputy/bailiff/whatever can get there to search her in a private screening area. If she's late for court, that's her problem. If she doesn't want to wait, she should just excuse herself to the location of her choice and remove it.

And, yes, I have seen underwire bras trip a magnetometer. However, prudence and common courtesy kept me from inquiring about the specific brand.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO! BAD TED!

It's not Rapy or McCreepy, it's Rapey McCreepypuff.

If you're going to go all Woe-Is-Me over the whole board, be sure and get whatever it is you are woeing right.

Now please, go on, don't let me interrupt your pity-masturbation.