TSA Agents Strip Mentally Disabled Man Of Toy Six-Inch Plastic Hammer

We have yet another horrific encounter with TSA. This time the incident occurred in Romulus, Michigan where a family was going to Disneyland and found two denizens waiting from them at the airport from the Unhappiest Place on Earth. Dr. David Mandy was walking his 29-year-old severely mentally disabled son through security when two agents spotted him.

Drew difficulty understanding orders to place his feet on the yellow shoe line and follow the TSA agents’ orders. When Dr. Mandy tried to explain his son was severely mentally disabled the TSA agents told him to back off and that they would handle the matter. They were concerned with his adult diaper and kept instructing him to rub his hand up the front and back of his pants.
They then turned their attention to a small plastic toy hammer and ball that Drew carries for comfort. As with children, Drew clings to the toys for a sense of security and has had the toys for years. One agent tapped it on the wall and reportedly said “See, it’s hard. It could be used as a weapon.”

The agents made the family surrender the six-inch hammer despite the trauma to Drew. The agents were convinced that Drew could try to take over the plane with his six-inch toy hammer. Unable to mail the hammer (a common and meaningless suggestion by TSA), they had to allow the agents to throw it out.

It would appear Drew was not the only severely mentally challenged person at the security checkpoint.

Source: Fox Detroit

23 thoughts on “TSA Agents Strip Mentally Disabled Man Of Toy Six-Inch Plastic Hammer

  1. From where do they recruit these fellows? The menza club?
    America has turned into a police state paranoid of everything.

  2. They have a policy of non-discrimination. They do not discriminate on the basis of competence or common sense.

  3. ” One agent tapped it on the wall and reportedly said “See, it’s hard. It could be used as a weapon.”


    One wonders if the same could be said about the agent’s head thus rendering him unfit to fly, too.

  4. Hey! Pay $7.50 an hour & take what you can get.

    Then there is problem “B”; nobody knows how the next attack will be staged. Having flown a lot I have several ideas but I don’t spend any time thinking about it. If the boys at AQ do I bet they can come up with some doozies. So the schmucks that get stuck with pretending to be doing something useful about airline safety cannot get good guidelines or training in advance. In fact, telling them exactly what to look for or what to do would actually make it easier to figure out what to do to get around them.

    Since we probably won’t hear about plans that get thwarted it is possible they have, if not stopped attacks at least demonstrated some plans to be failures.That hardly makes it worthwhile but thats because we refuse to come to grips with what the real risk is.

  5. It took them forever to figure out that fingernail clippers, available for $0.99 at the convenience store, were not deadly weapons one could use to commandeer a 747.

  6. Silly security theater.

    Plastic hammers don’t kill people, but a well trained person with a pen certainly could.


    By the nature of their logistical operation alone cannot be made perfectly safe.

    TSA = Huge Waste of Time and Money Accomplishing Nothing . . . unless of course you count the erosion of your Constitutional rights as an accomplishment.

    That is the end of the story.

  7. Meanwhile back at the ranch . . . another story of security theater.

    “The Los Angeles Police Commission has voted to kill the city’s controversial red-light camera program, rejecting claims that the system makes streets safer while costing the city nothing.

    Tuesday’s vote means that the red-light cameras installed at 32 intersections throughout the city could stop operating within a few weeks unless the City Council takes the unusual step of stripping the Police Commission of its authority over the issue.

    The move places Los Angeles at the center of a national debate about the cameras. The Los Angeles Police Department and other police agencies say the cameras have helped reduce accidents, largely by deterring drivers looking to run red lights or make illegal turns. Critics of the technology, however, have questioned officials’ accident data, saying the cameras instead cause rear-end collisions as drivers slam on their brakes. They have also likened the cameras to Big Brother tactics designed to generate revenues.

    If the commission’s action stands, L.A. would become the latest U.S. city to pull the cameras. Several others have vowed never to install them, including Anaheim, where voters overwhelming banned them last year.

    The Police Commission’s unanimous vote came as somewhat of a surprise to police officials, who went into the meeting armed with a recommendation that the commission award a new three- or five-year contract to the company that has been operating the network of cameras for the last several years.

    Instead of discussing the merits of that company’s service over other bidders, however, commissioners returned to a debate that has played out at several previous meetings in recent months and focused on the basic questions of whether the cameras do any good and are cost-effective.

    LAPD officials throughout the discussions have stood firm in the belief that the cameras increase safety, and they pointed to an internal review of accident data that, they said, shows the cameras have led to a 62% decrease in red-light collisions and no significant increase in rear-end collisions. Those figures, police said, were far better than the 22% decrease in red-light collisions at all city intersections.

    Members of the commission looked on those figures with skepticism. They also questioned the legitimacy of the citations issued to drivers photographed running red lights or involved in other moving violations. Because the Los Angeles County Superior Court system does not criminally pursue people who fail to pay the tickets, which typically run more than $400, the camera program essentially was “a voluntary citation program. There’s no teeth in it, no enforcement,” said Commissioner Alan Skobin.

    The court could alert the Department of Motor Vehicles when a driver fails to pay a ticket and request that a hold be placed on the vehicle owner’s license. The court ignores that option; instead it mails notices to vehicle owners warning that an additional $300 fine will be added if the citation is not resolved. If no response is received, the court forwards the vehicle owner’s name to a collection agency. Court officials have defended the decision, saying it complies with the law.

    In L.A., more than 180,000 motorists have received camera-issued tickets since the program started in 2004. The vast majority were for illegal right-hand turns.

    The commissioners also balked at the idea that it would cost the city more to operate the cameras than they would generate in revenue from tickets. Various proposals presented to the commission estimated that it would cost between $4 million and $5 million each year while bringing in only about $3.5 million annually.

    The camera program has often been touted by supporters as a service that paid for itself, although that claim came under scrutiny last year in an audit by Controller Wendy Greuel, who found it to be inaccurate.

    The expense, said Commission President John Mack, was untenable as the city remains mired in fiscal crisis.

    ‘We have to ask, ‘What is the benefit to the public? What is the downside?’ said Commissioner Debra Wong Yang. ‘And I’m not convinced from looking at the numbers that these cameras work.’

    Those sentiments were echoed by several members of the public who attended the meeting to urge the commission to do away with the cameras, which trigger seemingly boundless frustration and anger among drivers in traffic-obsessed L.A.

    ‘It’s something that angers … me every time I get in my car,’ said Hollywood resident Christina Heller, 27. ‘These cameras remove our fundamental right in this country to confront our accuser. And they do not do anything to improve safety.’


  8. The elimination of bureaucratic discretion is symptomatic of a society whose security policies are driven by fear rather than reason.

  9. I am wondering if the Patriot Act requires all federal departments to have SWAT teams with the mental capacity of the TSA as the fundamental model for those SWAT teams.

  10. Relevant to this story and the Education Department raid is an ABA report that the extension of police powers to various agencies was part of the Homeland Security Act in 2002. It appears that this authority was granted to some 27 agencies including, get this, the Tennessee Valley Authority. http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/aim_of_swat-like_raid_was_student-aid_fraud_education_dept._given_police_po/?utm_source=maestro&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=weekly_email

  11. The TSA workers who abused this handicapped young man should be walking the streets to look for another job. Who hires these guys or better yet who trains them???
    Unfortunately, I think you are correct.
    Mike A.
    thanks for the info on the Homeland Security Act of 2002. I should have guessed that these SWAT agencies had their birth during the Bush regime and now President Obama is going along for the ride.

  12. To be honest, I’m not surprised at what TSA just did to that poor family. Me and majority of my co-workers hate TSA with so much passion that we no longer tell them that we are law enforcement officers because we do not… *cough-cough* to be associated with them.

    Sadly, TSA are not trained well to incorporate their service with people with both physical and mental disabilities. I also have to admit that not all police officers are exempt from this claim as well.


  13. Sounds like those guys are trained in a way that doesn’t allow for any exceptions, its all black and white to them and they probably dont know how to deal with the situation in any other way.

    Its sad and must have been confusing and frightening for the young man.

  14. I remember the voices of some politicians who promised to reconsider the measures instigated at airports so that disabled people don’t get this kind of treatment but it seems to me that they have once again gone back on their promises.

  15. […] only outlaws will have toy plastic hammers: We have yet another horrific encounter with TSA. This time the incident occurred in Romulus, Michigan where a family was going to Disneyland and found two denizens waiting from them at the airport from the Unhappiest Place on Earth. Dr. David Mandy was walking his 29-year-old severely mentally disabled son through security when two agents spotted him. […]

Comments are closed.