Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-25-2015, 11:06 AM
 
4,749 posts, read 4,324,858 times
Reputation: 4970

Advertisements

This stems from a comment from a story where someone said, "Crimes against the disabled !". This lead me to say to myself, "How would someone know if another person had Asperger's?"

The person had Asperger's Syndrome and was accused of stealing. He was placed in handcuffs, and ridiculed around the store; however, they never found the missing items.



Please remember we aren't here to debate whether or not the punishment was appropriate. The debate topic is whether or not it can still be considered a crime against a disabled person if you didn't know they were disabled?

 
Old 01-25-2015, 11:46 AM
 
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
5,404 posts, read 16,001,992 times
Reputation: 8095
What is the crime here? Is it because they accused without proof, or because they hassled him? Seems to me, it would be just as awful if it happened to a non-Asperger's person!

The "disability" seems to have nothing to do with it!
 
Old 01-25-2015, 11:53 AM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,894,387 times
Reputation: 18305
Look at the intent to find what mental state is require with whatever crime. Knowingly; intentional; criminal negligence and recklessly are the four.
 
Old 01-25-2015, 11:58 AM
Status: "Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge." (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,603,118 times
Reputation: 5697
This one cuts in a few directions.

If the employer had no evidence suggesting the person had a disability, then I can't see any grounds for intent or careless indifference to their fundamental rights.

However, if the employer learned later that the person was disabled, the employer should offer to hire them back. At the very least, they should vouch for the disabled person with a vocational rehabilitation service.


I won't comment about the appropriateness of the punishment, as the OP requested.
 
Old 01-25-2015, 01:04 PM
 
4,749 posts, read 4,324,858 times
Reputation: 4970
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb at sea View Post
What is the crime here? Is it because they accused without proof, or because they hassled him? Seems to me, it would be just as awful if it happened to a non-Asperger's person!

The "disability" seems to have nothing to do with it!
I think shouldn't have posted the story because I didn't want to debate about it. The topic is whether or not it should still be considered a crime against a disabled person if you didn't know they were disabled.

Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Look at the intent to find what mental state is require with whatever crime. Knowingly; intentional; criminal negligence and recklessly are the four.
Good point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil75230 View Post
This one cuts in a few directions.

If the employer had no evidence suggesting the person had a disability, then I can't see any grounds for intent or careless indifference to their fundamental rights.

However, if the employer learned later that the person was disabled, the employer should offer to hire them back. At the very least, they should vouch for the disabled person with a vocational rehabilitation service.


I won't comment about the appropriateness of the punishment, as the OP requested.
I agree. And thanking for not mentioning the details of the article.
 
Old 01-25-2015, 05:29 PM
 
Location: My beloved Bluegrass
20,126 posts, read 16,170,612 times
Reputation: 28335

Not exactly sure what's going on here, but there seems to be an issue.

OP or another interested poster, if you want to discuss what I suspect is supposed to be the intended debate of this thread - Should a person be held criminally or civilly responsible for not accommodating a person's disability if that disability isn't clear - then I think this thread probably needs to be restarted. Among other things, you need to explain what you mean by crimes against the disabled or change how you word it if you are talking about repercussions, whether in actual court or the court of public opinion, as a result of non-accommodation.

Just start a new, revised thread, if you want.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.Moderator - Diabetes and Kentucky (including Lexington & Louisville)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:17 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top