It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is your opinion (dealing with mentally disabled?)

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


One thing I forgot to address with my previous post:

Obviously it's impossible to devise the specific mental state of the man based on this video, but to say that everyone with downs is unable to know the difference between right or wrong is inaccurate. I know two people with downs specifically, and a few other with somewhat similar/related disabilities, and they know full well the difference between right and wrong, and they know for sure you do not hit/kick people.

I wouldn't blame someone for something impossible to control, but there is no reason to believe this man was unable to control his actions. He seems to be functioning quite well for his condition and sometimes people just misbehave. Just because someone is mentally disabled doesn't mean they aren't capable of making the choice to do something bad like kick a little kid.




posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Dianec
 


This does not require being a mental health specialist to recognise people with autism like Down Syndrome, at least in stronger cases like this one. Despite the bad quality of the video, his facial and behavioural characteristics it is clear that that guy had autism or some syndrome.

reply to post by James1982
 


I understand the need for eliminating the threat. Although this could have done far less violently. You have to consider that you do not know whether you will knock somebody out or not. Even if the father was not aware of the man having autism (which I find doubtful), he could have made the situation even more risky for himself and the child by starting a fight with a stranger, who might have had a weapon. The best way for eliminating threat for him would have been going for the arms of the man with Down Syndrome between the man and son. This would have eliminated the threat of the stranger grabbing a firearm or a knife from pocket, eliminated the threat towards son and given enough time for the woman and employee to interfere. Considering the father had stronger build he would not have had any trouble eliminating the problem that way.

This was harsh and impulsive decision, especially considering that he could have killed the man with Down Syndrome that way(These are rare, but sometimes the one-hit kills happen if one hits the wrong spot in the head or the person who gets knocked out unluckily ) or created a situation which I described before.

There are way too many people who make such decisions out there. Even when some people might find this particular case justified, there are others who find it justified to impulsively react to insults or something they do not agree with.

Best way of defusing situations like that is by taking it calmly. If needed using defensive methods (like the one I described before) rather than attacking ones, which can have significantly worse consequences for both.




edit on 6-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:19 AM
link   
I was sickened by the video.

And by all the posts defending the indefensible actions of the father.

Tut tut.

For shame.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:21 AM
link   

CJCrawley
I was sickened by the video.

And by all the posts defending the indefensible actions of the father.

Tut tut.

For shame.


I take it youre not a father, if you WERE, your reaction would be the same. Someone go to kick or strike my son, downs or not, I';ll knock the crap out of them. Bottom line.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


FOR SHAME HOMER!

We should use his mental problem as a crutch and let him hit whoever he deems necessary. Do you not have a heart man?

MOTF!



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:26 AM
link   

rival
I say no harm no foul.

The man protecting/defending his son reacted immediately-
-no malice aforethought.

As it also seems the down-syndrome child did as well.

The responsibility lies with the down-syndrome child's caretaker.


This. If you see what appears to be a grown man suddenly try to use your small child as a football, you stop him right there and then. Dad probably did not know the man had Downs, but it really does not matter as a grown man with mental problems can still severely injure a little kid. A father's first and foremost priority is to protect his child.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


Good for you, sir; that makes you a very enlightened human being.

You must be very proud.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Life is decisions...

Just because a person can do a thing, does not necessarily mean they should do a thing.

The child was already kicked.. Did hitting the handicapped person make the father feel more like a father?

More like a man?

Protective instinct would mean the father would try and prevent the initial assault. Action taken after is only revenge..

As a father myself I am not sure what I would have done, but I do know that just striking out without at the least finding out the reason for the initial action is wrong on many levels



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   

CJCrawley
I was sickened by the video.

And by all the posts defending the indefensible actions of the father.

Tut tut.

For shame.


How are these actions indefensible? One of the most basic instincts of any parent is to protect their child. If you see someone assaulting your child, you go in and stop them. A full sized man can severely injure or even kill a little child in seconds, so a parent should stop them in seconds.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:39 AM
link   

semperfortis
Life is decisions...

Just because a person can do a thing, does not necessarily mean they should do a thing.

The child was already kicked.. Did hitting the handicapped person make the father feel more like a father?

More like a man?

Protective instinct would mean the father would try and prevent the initial assault. Action taken after is only revenge..

As a father myself I am not sure what I would have done, but I do know that just striking out without at the least finding out the reason for the initial action is wrong on many levels


The entire video was 58 seconds long. The assault was not over until the father made it over.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Cabin
reply to post by Dianec
 


This does not require being a mental health specialist to recognise people with autism like Down Syndrome, at least in stronger cases like this one. Despite the bad quality of the video, his facial and behavioural characteristics it is clear that that guy had autism or some syndrome.

reply to post by James1982
 


I understand the need for eliminating the threat. Although this could have done far less violently. You have to consider that you do not know whether you will knock somebody out or not. Even if the father was not aware of the man having autism (which I find doubtful), he could have made the situation even more risky for himself and the child by starting a fight with a stranger, who might have had a weapon. The best way for eliminating threat for him would have been going for the arms of the man with Down Syndrome between the man and son. This would have eliminated the threat of the stranger grabbing a firearm or a knife from pocket, eliminated the threat towards son and given enough time for the woman and employee to interfere. Considering the father had stronger build he would not have had any trouble eliminating the problem that way.

This was harsh and impulsive decision, especially considering that he could have killed the man with Down Syndrome that way(These are rare, but sometimes the one-hit kills happen if one hits the wrong spot in the head or the person who gets knocked out unluckily ) or created a situation which I described before.

There are way too many people who make such decisions out there. Even when some people might find this particular case justified, there are others who find it justified to impulsively react to insults or something they do not agree with.

Best way of defusing situations like that is by taking it calmly. If needed using defensive methods (like the one I described before) rather than attacking ones, which can have significantly worse consequences for both.




edit on 6-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)


Nonsense. You don't wrestle with an assailant just because he might have a mental disability--that is a good way to get a knife in you--you stop the threat as quickly as possible.

Comparing striking a person who is assaulting your child to striking a person who insulted you is silly. The two are not comparable.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


If you go for arms, you prevent the person on grabbing the knife from pocket and eliminate fist attacks at the same time.

You think its smarter to hit first and wait what the other guy does than trying to disarm the assailant?

I´ve used the method several times, when my friends have gotten to fight or somebody has tried to hit me. Works like magic, unless the other is significantly stronger or is very good at martial arts. Although haven´t come across that yet.

These might be uncomparable, but violence is violence. Only defensive positions meant to disarm opponent or stop the attack are justified in my eyes, never attacking ones, as in most cases these just hurt the other instead of defusing the situation and eliminating the threat.
edit on 6-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by NavyDoc
 



How are these actions indefensible?


Because the father could clearly see that he was dealing with a slightly-built, bespectacled person with a compromised brain.

And having your sprog in tow doesn't give you carte blanche to go full psycho in public at the least opportunity.


(post by webedoomed removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Cabin
reply to post by NavyDoc
 


If you go for arms, you prevent the person on grabbing the knife from pocket and eliminate fist attacks at the same time.

You think its smarter to hit first and wait what the other guy does than trying to disarm the assailant?

I´ve used the method several times, when my friends have gotten to fight or somebody has tried to hit me. Works like magic, unless the other is significantly stronger or is very good at martial arts. Although haven´t come across that yet.

These might be uncomparable, but violence is violence. Only defensive positions meant to disarm opponent or stop the attack are justified in my eyes, never attacking ones, as in most cases these just hurt the other instead of defusing the situation and eliminating the threat.
edit on 6-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)


The Dad both defused the situation and eliminated the threat in a split second.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 10:40 AM
link   

CJCrawley
reply to post by NavyDoc
 



How are these actions indefensible?


Because the father could clearly see that he was dealing with a slightly-built, bespectacled person with a compromised brain.

And having your sprog in tow doesn't give you carte blanche to go full psycho in public at the least opportunity.

But having a compromised brain gives one carte blanche to assault small children? I've seen children severely injured and, in one case beaten to death, by someone with "compromised brains." A parent's basic duty is to defend his kids. You give the initial assault a pass because it was someone with less than average intelligence because it may be PC to do that, but the guy was still capable of hurting the kid badly.

The entire video was 58 seconds. Realistically, the dad did not have the time to fully evaluate the mental state, history, feelings, and functionality of the attacker. All he saw was someone trying to use his toddler like a football and he stopped it, immediately.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 10:43 AM
link   
A person with downs syndrome can be taught right from wrong action most times. It is a lot harder though. Sometimes the special forgive and accept treatment people use can make the person unable to adapt to living in public later. A person with Downs has to be trained to suppress their socially unacceptable behavior even though they do not really understand the concept of why.

If there were no laws, most people today would do more uncivil things. The fear of repercussions from your actions keeps people civil most times and society grows. When you spoil a kid and get them out of trouble it often leads to more trouble by the kids as they get older. They get used to being able to get away with things. They hang around with others of their kind, and later become politicians or work with the stock market



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   

rickymouse
A person with downs syndrome can be taught right from wrong action most times. It is a lot harder though. Sometimes the special forgive and accept treatment people use can make the person unable to adapt to living in public later. A person with Downs has to be trained to suppress their socially unacceptable behavior even though they do not really understand the concept of why.

If there were no laws, most people today would do more uncivil things. The fear of repercussions from your actions keeps people civil most times and society grows. When you spoil a kid and get them out of trouble it often leads to more trouble by the kids as they get older. They get used to being able to get away with things. They hang around with others of their kind, and later become politicians or work with the stock market


That was very well written.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Lol!... Handy there was someone there ready with camera. After all they were

(initially) taking a video of a 'down syndrome' youth on a mobile? ... Why? would a

third party be doing that? ... Hardly an interesting subject??


The child was obviously not hurt ... no crying, no holding on to body parts etc.


IMO it's a set up.



A couple of years ago my grandson and friends were doing similar videos for a laugh,

one of the things they had me doing was making it look like they were holding me

back in my small car in superman outfits!



Reminds me of that old TV programme 'Candid Camera' anyone on here remember

that TV programme?
edit on 6-11-2013 by eletheia because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 11:31 AM
link   
I certainly sympathize with the father here. If it were my own child I don't know that I would have been as restrained as he was. I'd like to think I would've done something different but when it comes to my kids safety I'm a bit rash and impulsive. However, if the father was to in the wrong why not call the police, it looks like he just took off with the kid and went elsewhere. There really just isn't enough information in this short clip to make a well founded reply. Though from the grainy video the initial attacker clearly has Down's. it's not an Excuse for his actions at all but it definitely wouldn have affected how I responded if I were aware before tossing him to the ground.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join