Aspies For Freedom

I am also totally appalled at what Jason_6404 wrote.  It is sick, twisted and evil.  

To call Jackie Marshall,  the woman who Shane Freer murdered,  as "the NT"  is to dehumanise her.  Like calling a Jewish person who is murdered "the Jew".    

Fortunately  it is extremely unlikely that any of Mrs Marshall's family or friends will ever read Jason_64's hate-filled opinion.   However there should be an 'official' repudiation by Amy and Gareth  on behalf of AFF of what Jason_64 wrote, so that everyone who reads  this thread will know that we do not condone or approve of murder in any way.

I agree, we're probably the least likely to murder anyone or commit other violent crimes. If anything, that person was more of a sociopath than aspie, based strictly on his actions as I'm no psychiatrist. The last thing we need is to be stereotyped as killers, that could lead to more abuse of aspie or autistic children and adults.

Either the facts in that article were correct in which case you truly are a moron or they are false, in which case I would be seeking legal advice.

Are you saying this article is false? In what way was it false?

If someone wrongs you, there are legitimate means of seeking justice for it which do not cause further problems. Revenge is a human instinct, however when not controlled by the rational mind it can cause people to behave in destructive and foolish ways.

Personally I have been bullied a lot in my life but it would be insanely stupid to take out revenge on my former bullies in a violent manner. I advocate self defence when physically attacked, and legal forms of revenge but dragging yourself down into further trouble in the name of revenge is just stupid. If you are physically attacked, your best plan of action is to get the attacker off you and then run to safety. Nearly all assaults can be defended against without the use of excessive force.

The death penalty and private individuals committing murder are 2 completely things. In the case of the former, the defendant is given a trial and other safeguards and the execution takes place in a controlled legal manner meaning that the prosecutor does not have to risk facing murder charges themselves. In the case of a private individual there are no safeguards and you will almost certainly be charged with manslaughter at the very least.

At the time the article was published the charges were still being pressed, correct?
If they have now been dropped then you may want to contact the webmaster of that site and ask for the article to be updated. The article itself though is not gossip at all but a statement of facts.

What I am saying is that reasonable self defence should be practiced. Personally if I was so concerned about my safety that I felt I had to carry a concealed weapon then I would be looking at restraint orders and other remedies against whomever I felt was a danger.

So you were charged with assault, and then proved in court that you were not charged with assault and were not arrested? That doesn't make sense. The article claims you were arrested and charged with assault. Regardless of whether or not the charges were later dropped, at the time it was accurate.

Jason_4604,  you wrote:

Those disgusting, contemptible, ignorant,  bigoted statements are completely unacceptable and inexusable.   They denigrate mentally challenged people, and wheelchair users.   I assume by "they"  you are referring to mentally challenged people.   They are capable of understanding their native language at the everyday level,  if maybe not academic language.

There are autistic people who have been diagnosed as 'mentally retarded',  but who write intelligently and eloquently.  

There is good in you,  Jason and I really hope that you discover it,  and that you  will come to be ashamed and disgusted at your action in carrying an offensive weapon and injuring  someone with it,  and justifying it and glorifying in it;  also your condoning  murder and your remarks which I have quoted above,  and that you will repudiate those actions and attitudes.

Jason, it's an old saying, but a true one,  "Violence Begets more violence."
It's just a self perpetuating thing.  I have revenge fantasies like you wouldn't believe, but, thats it, they're fantasies and thats as far as they are going to go.  Mind you, if someone hurts my daughter or wife, then fantasy may become reality, depending upon opportunity.  Or if somebody corners me and I have no choice, then, yes, if I'm going down, I sure intend to drag somebody down with me.    I just don't intend to descend to the same level as the bullies and scumbags.

I don't know what the law is in the UK, but, there is a zero tolerance policy in almost all US schools about weapons or anything that could be used as a weapon.  Hell, kids have been suspended for bringing in nail clippers with files into school.

Maybe you think your being "real" or injecting "reality" into this forum, but, the reality is, there are better ways!

Peace

There is nothing that justifies mindless murder, violence or anger!

Peace

Lets face it, the murderer's actions of mindless violence have hurt many more than his unfortunate victim.  Violence leaves its stain on many, as Mark's words show.

Peace

Once again, Timelord, you make sense!   Well said!

Peace

Excuse me?
"Aspies should never be allowed to work in customer service"
"I think the media should look at this properly - and I happen to think the murderer should appeal the sentence."

I would sincerely hope that if he did appeal the sentence the appeal would fail. Aspie or NT, if you commit murder, you should be punished as a murderer. Is this so difficult to see?

AS was not the root cause of this incident, even if the guy did have some traits. If I had to guess I would say some element of sociopathy was present.

What I object to is your statement that aspies should never be allowed to work in such jobs. I agree that they can be rather stressful but this should be up to the individual concerned to decide.

This murder was most certainly not premeditated and this is something I can agree with you on. In normal circumstances this alone would involve a lesser sentence due to it being in the heat of the moment. The fact that he indicated that he would do this again and showed no remorse does however justify further precautions against him being allowed to walk amongst the public.

In many cases, people freely choose to take such jobs. It is much less common for a pre-existing employer to force someone to change roles.

I know exactly what you mean here but there is a difference between just stewing over an injustice and actively seeking violent revenge. Most are intelligent enough to know the difference and to not act upon their violent urges.

Second degree murder or manslaughter - there's no evidence he planned it in advance and it was very much in the heat of the moment. However, the fact he showed no remorse and stated that he would do it again if he felt the need is enough to justify a life sentence in my view for the sake of protecting the public.

In many cases there is an alternative - even if it is lower pay and/or less pleasant. In the case of mcdonalds, working in the back preparing food is one such alternative which is better than directly speaking to customers.

I have had some horrendous injustices done against me. My first natural human instinct with some people is to want to severely hurt them, but in doing so i'd be hurting myself and a lot of others who don't deserve it at the same time. If I was to ever lose my self-control when confronted with an enemy then i'd fight in court but I would expect to receive some kind of harsh punishment. Thankfully my normal reaction when confronted with an enemy is to get away from them and pursue non-violent and legal alternatives. This is the rational way to do things.

Criminal acts that occur in the heat of the moment are known to happen. It is up to the individual who commits the act to restrain themselves in moments of anger before an offense is committed. This is taken into account in law where a lesser sentence is given to those who did not plan out a violent act. Extreme emotional trauma leading to a state of insanity can sometimes be used as a defence though the line between normal anger with a failure to restrain oneself and insanity is often unclear. Personally I am of the belief that unless someone is literally drugged against their will or delusional due to mental illness then extreme emotion alone is not enough to warrant a lesser sentence. The other issue to consider is public protection - even if someone was severely mentally ill and delusional at the time of an incident locking them up for treatment is necessary to protect the public.

As I do not know all the details of this case (I was not standing in the courtroom) I should perhaps reserve judgement on what his sentence should be but at the very least he requires a full psychiatric evaluation and careful monitoring if he's ever allowed back into the community.