Breaking into a foreign military's computer systems == jail sentence

Regardless, this statement was not aimed at yourself but at those who do think he should get a lighter sentence simply due to his diagnosis.

As I said - this is not an autism rights issue.

Guantanamo is more than a jail. It is our territory by right. The jail and torture center should be shut down immediately. If there are no provable charges its prisoners should be released !

It is not about mere disagreement or somehow "owing" something to AFF. Unless you redefine the cause of autism rights to extend it with "autism privileges" autism should not be used to get someone a lesser sentence when they break the law.

The media already do a good enough job at times of painting a negative picture of autism, why help the process along by implying that autistics have diminished responsibility for their actions?

Of course, should any organisation have their own cause that does include granting some kind of extra leniency to autistics charged with crimes, they're welcome to do so - just so long as they do not expect others to believe such views are beneficial to autistics.

I agree with you Gareth, but only up to a point.  I believe personally that the motive behind why a person breaks the law should have some bearing on the case.  It seems to me that the man is being tried on terrorism charges, stealing information etc.  Yet he was looking for secret files on UFOs, which can hardly be said to be a terrorist concern, or a threat to Western security.

One article I read this weekend on the case said this: "These (secret UFO files) aren't the secrets the US establishment fears being revealed; it's the notion that a self-taught hacker ... could wander at will through the firewalls of the world's largest military industrial complex that has really irked the forces of law and order ... McKinnon is being punished for their embarrassment at the revelation that their security isn't very secure at all.  So now, instead of receiving a slap on the wrist, McKinnon could be imprisoned for up to 70 years ... For now he's going to have to pay the price for Uncle Sam's discomfiture at being caught with his trousers down."  Scotsman, 21 Sept 2009, http://tinyurl.com/6bqz98

I'd agree that he should be imprisoned if he'd been stealing information to sell to terrorists.  But he was trying to find info on UFOs.  The punishment should fit the crime, he shouldn't be punished for the paranoia of the US government.
Alison

The crime still has nothing to do with him being Aspie, other than it being an obsession. The protest should be about him being turned over to the US. A human rights issue.

He deleted several user accounts and OS components according to the indictment, but even if he hadn't it's still a criminal act to connect unauthorised in the manner in which he did.

The actual details of the case here aren't what the statement I have posted is about though. The simple fact is that he should not be excused or given a lesser sentence due to autism alone. If anyone can show that an NT would be treated more favourably in his situation, then it would be reasonable to call this an autism rights issue - but all the evidence shows that if anything he's likely to get better treatment due to all the protests that are citing his diagnosis.

I find it sad that people don't see this obvious point: if there are actual injustices here (and i'm staying as neutral as I can be on this point) then they are not due to Gary's diagnosis or due to prejudice against autistics. However, citing his diagnosis could lead to increased prejudice very very easily. It's a very dangerous path to go down to seek judgement that autistics are less responsible for their actions in criminal cases, because if it sets a precedent that precedent can easily be cited when it comes to matters such as forced treatment.

I get that point, really I do, and entirely agree with you on it: I also feel it is a slippery slope to go down if we start seeking leniency due to Aspergers.  Autism has nothing to do with what he did.  However, autism/aspergers aside, I still feel the hysterical response of the US government is way over the top.  And again, I think a far better use could be made of him by employing him to design better security to keep real terrorists out. He was apparently able to hack into top-secret sites using nothing more than an old PC (it was described as a "piece of junk" by one reporter) and a dial-up modem.  So whatever we may think of him, the guy has talents that could be used better than rotting in a cell somewhere.
Alison

A lot of hackers obtain good jobs in the security fields once they complete their prison sentences

If he gets 60 years, as has been posited, McKinnon will be 104 by the time he gets out.  Not a particularly good age to start a new career.
Alison

Just sixty years of his life.
Alison

In any case, it's typical over the top hysteria by the USA. For goodness sake, trying him in the UK is the fairest thing and possibly he could just be put on home detention. Also, have the authorities never heard of setting a thief to catch a thief? Somebody that smart would be a real asset in foiling further attempts to hack into their systems.

Sure. If he was black, we would see black people's organisations, among others, protesting his extradition. If he was gay, we would see gay people's organisations, among others, protesting his extradition.
Since Gary is an autistic Londoner and since the association of autistic Londoners is called "The London Autistic Rights Movement", we saw that particular organisation, among others, protesting his extradition.

Odd, i've seen gays protest against linking homosexuality with crime......

Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, an electrician, Brazilian.  Running for his train, shot to death in London, because he "looked South Asian and had what looked like wires under his coat".  Yes, they do carry guns.  US is not the only paranoid country.
Alison

And here's just a couple more:

The policy under which British police use firearms has resulted in some controversy. The following are examples of incidents of shootings by British police officers.

In June 1980, hostage Gail Kinchin and her unborn baby were killed in crossfire between West Midlands officers and her deranged boyfriend. Later, he stood trial for her murder but, after an 18-day hearing, was found not guilty. No officer was prosecuted[citation needed].

On 17 January 1983 Stephen Waldorf was shot by police hunting David Martin, who absconded from custody at Marlborough Street magistrates' court where he was due to face a charge of attempting to murder a police officer. Waldorf was critically injured in a police ambush in a west London street after he was mistaken for Martin. He was shot five times, and then pistol whipped by an officer who had attempted to shoot him in the head, but had already used all his ammunition. Two officers, John Jardine and Peter Finch, stood trial for attempted murder and attempted wounding but were cleared of all charges in October 1983. Waldorf made a full recovery and eventually received compensation.[25]

On 24 August 1985 John Shorthouse aged 5 was shot dead in a police raid on his home in Birmingham. The incident produced hostility towards the police over two days after John's death when a policewoman was dragged from her patrol car and beaten by youths. PC Brian Chester, stood trial for manslaughter but was acquitted. Following the Shorthouse case, West Midlands police abandoned its practice of training rank-and-file officers for firearms duties and formed a specialist squad.[26]

On 15 January 1987 Cherry Groce a mother-of-six was shot and paralysed by officers looking for her son. The shooting sparked riots in Brixton which led to the death of a photographer, hit on the head by a brick. The officer was cleared of all criminal charges.[27]

In 1998 James Ashley, was shot and killed by Sussex Police while naked and unarmed during a drugs raid at his flat.[28]

On June 1999 Derek Bateman, 47, of Surrey was shot by a single bullet through the heart after his girlfriend went to a neighbour's house and telephone the police, telling them he was armed and had threatening to shoot her. It was then determined that the weapon he had brandished at the police was an air pistol. No officer was prosecuted.[29]

On 22 September 1999 Harry Stanley, a painter and decorator, born in Bellshill near Glasgow, was walking home when he shot dead by two Metropolitan Police officers following an erroneous report that he was carrying a sawn-off shotgun in a plastic bag. The officers challenged Mr Stanley from behind as he turned to face them, they shot him dead at a distance of 5 metres. It later emerged that the plastic bag actually contained a broken table leg that Stanley's brother had just fixed for him. Following numerous enquiries (in November 2004 a jury returned a verdict of unlawful killing) both officers were exonerated after 6 years of court cases and inquiries. It was found that neither officer was liable for criminal charges nor would face any disciplinary sanctions. However, the report did make notable recommendations to the police on the post-incident procedure to be followed after a shooting and about challenging members of the public from behind.[30]

On 12 July 2001 Mr Andrew Kernan, 37, a gardener from Wavertree in Liverpool was shot dead in the street by the second of two shots fired by officers of the Merseyside Police Force. The officers had been called to the scene by the victim's mother, Marie Kernan, who had also requested a psychiatric medical team attend her home because her schizophrenic son, Andrew Kernan, was being aggressive. At least four police officers from the Merseyside force went to Mrs Kernan's flat but Andrew Kernan ran into the street, dressed in his pyjamas, wielding a Samurai sword. Mr Kernan slashed off the wing mirror of one of the police cars. After negotiating with him for 25 minutes and using CS gas officers fired two shots. The second bullet hit Mr Kernan in the chest and he died on the way to hospital.

In the case of Andrew Kernan, the Chief Constable of Merseyside Police Norman Bettison took the unusual step of sending a hand-written letter to Marie Kernan with his apologies. The then Home Secretary David Blunkett ordered a review of how armed police were used, and the dead man's mother, Marie Kernan, 59, commented at the time: "You don't kill somebody with a mental illness. I demand justice for Andrew and won't rest until I get an answer." However, a verdict of lawful killing was returned by the jury at Liverpool District Coroner's Court on 9 December 2004, and the Coroner, Andre Rebello, praised the actions of the officers at the scene. The IPCA Commissioner for the North West, Mike Franklin, stated that “the officers involved in this case were presented with a rapidly evolving scenario... Firearms officers at the scene acted bravely and the investigation has found no evidence that their actions fell below that required or expected of them." [31]

In July 2005, West Yorkshire police tasered a man in hypoglycemic shock, believing that he was a potential security threat.[32]

On 22 July 2005, Jean Charles de Menezes, a Brazilian national living in London, was shot dead by unnamed Metropolitan Police officers on board an Underground train at Stockwell tube station, in the belief he was a suicide bomber. Initially, police claimed incorrectly that he was wearing bulky clothing and that he had vaulted the ticket barriers running from police. It soon became clear that de Menezes did not vault and run from the police, but police did not correct their statement until the correct information was leaked to the press. They later issued an apology, saying that they had mistaken him for a suspect in the previous day's failed bombings and acknowledging that de Menezes in fact had no explosives and was unconnected with the attempted bombings. Following an investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), the Crown Prosecution Service announced on 17 July 2006, that no charges would be brought against any individual officers in relation to the death of Jean Charles. Sir Ian Blair, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police will, however, face charges under Health and Safety legislation in his professional - rather than personal - capacity. The family of Jean Charles has called on the government to open a public inquiry into the shooting.[33]

On 2 June 2006, two family homes were raided in an operation involving 250 police in east London. One man, Abdul Kahar, was shot in the shoulder by police during the raid, but was later released without charge. The raid was based on faulty intelligence. No officer has been prosecuted in connection with the shooting.

According to an October 2005 article in The Independent, in the preceding 12 years, 30 people had been shot dead by police, and no officers had been convicted in connection with any of them. [34] However, in the absence of any criminal proceedings against most of these officers following independent investigation, and the acquittal of the rest by juries, this supports the premise that the use of firearms by British police is proportionate to the threat involved.

Alison

And I've seen numerous, countless campaigns over the years where the gay 'community' has rallied around an individual facing deportation (and don't forget, on lots of occasions, an asylum seeker will have entered the country illegal, perhaps using fake documents).  And the gay 'community' protests against unfair and discriminatory laws that affect other people within their community, not just themselves individually.

I agree with this, although this is, as you have stated, a media portrayal issue and NOT an issue of whether or not the individual genuinely has difficulty identifying the consequences of their actions.

If they do have such difficulties (as many autistics do) then it is important for these to be acknowledged so that appropriate support can be put in place to ensure the individual's safety and to facilitate their independent living.

The same difficulties with media portrayal exist with mental health issues. This doesn't mean that people should argue that mental health issues don't exist or aren't disabling - this just means that there should be better regulations governing the media portrayal of people with disabilities.

Not necessarily. If this is done within the context of responsible reporting (so that the facts are explained clearly rather than essentially implying that people on the autistic spectrum are tantamount to psychopaths) then it would be far less 'harmful' - if at all.

Some autistics do have difficulty controlling their actions, and this should be recognised and acknowledged in order that autistics can access the support that they need and should be entitled to.

Ideally, it would be the lack of support for autistics that is demonised in the press and not autistics themselves.

can you elaborate on when this happened?

No such posts have been deleted - you can see quite clearly in this thread that many people have posted contradicting views to my own.

If they are trying to post in public, then their usernames are not a matter of confidentiality. Let me know what their usernames were and which thread they tried to post on and i'll investigate.

I have emailed the relevant people to ask for info. For the record I have no reason to believe that the people who told me this would lie to me.

I appreciate there could have been a technical issue or misunderstanding.

generally, the LGBT community only do this in cases where the asylum seeker concerned has left thier own country due to homophobic laws & institutionalised persecution and, if returned, are likely to be killed. its never just an asylum seeker who happens to be gay.

I agree with Gareth, we can't claim we want equal rights as a minority group then turn round & say "go easy, he's an aspie". yes, the usa is paranoid, but I have trouble believing that someone who can pass through the (ok, far from perfect) british education system without getting a diagnosis is unable to understand that there are consequences for hacking into government computer systems whether the reasons for the hacking are related to terrorrism, to proove a conspiracy theory, to test your hacking ability or just challenge george bush to beat your tetrice score.

Anything further happen with this?

Guantanamo Bay is leased to the United States government as a navel base after Cuba got its indepedence from Spain in 1898, which means that Cuba is allowing the United States jurisdiction and control while Cuba have sovereignty over it (translation Gitmo is Cuban soil, not US soil). It has nothing to do with current US-Cuba relations, which deals with the Cold War (ie Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missle Crisis, the embargo, and Fidel Castro). The only way that Cuba would have full control of Guantanamo is if the United States abandon the area.

Perhaps worthy of note is that it is so much easier beat down and get the non-violent and the innocent to plead guilty than it is to do the same to the hardened criminals.  

I would regard not extraditing McKinnon as an act of justice and human rights.  

I shudder to think how other prisoners would treat an Aspie such as McKinnon.  The indignities at Abu Ghreb would pale in comparison to some of what goes on in U.S. Prisons.  

Sentance him in the UK, that would be far more humane.

That is the same perverted logic as the heaping of excess charges in the US when plea bargaining.  

For having the audacity to defend youself you incur the wrath of the almighty legal system.  Roll over and play dead and maybe they will be nice to you.  So if you are innocent and get convicted anyway you get maximized injustice.

Keep McKinnon home, don't let our legal bastards get their hands on him.

I agree keep him in the UK, prison is supposed to be a punishment in its own right, you are there as punishment not to be punished!

and for an AS person the prison experience would be much harder for many reasons including social phobias etc. so it would be reaonable to consdier AS when sentencing!

Have i got it wrong? I thought Gary was in the UK when the deed he was allleged to have commited happened? or am i wrong again?

I am sorry, but I must disagree.  Mr. McKinnon is a true hero.  As an American, I consider him truer to the spirit of our Revolutionary War than our current military-industrial complex.  Of course, the ideology of our Revolution built on the English precedents of Locke and the Whig radicals.  So, having an Englishmen bring us back to common sense builds on the legacy of another Englishman who did the same...



Of course, this revolution will be peaceful, since it will involve an evolution of the mind.

If you're an american you should feel just the same way about McKinnon as I do, but worse. Your life was threatened by his actions.

He broke into and disabled military systems during september 2001.
What happened on the 11th of that month which required the US military to be at full readiness? The military would not have been unreasonable at the time to suspect him of being an Al-Qaeda agent, even american teens have been hired to break into US systems by terrorists (read the book "the art of intrusion" by Kevin Mitnick).

More to the point - what he did would have been criminal regardless. His statement that he was looking for info on UFOs only doesn't hold water due to the damage he caused by deleting various system files. If he was just looking for info on UFOs and not otherwise causing harm i'd have more sympathy for him, his actions would still be essentially criminal but in my view forgivable.

Instead, he left taunting messages before bringing down large numbers of machines.

Tell me, if he was completely innocent and not malicious, what does this mean?

He claimed he was looking for (and found) UFO evidence. He also confessed to being the one to leave that message. If he was looking for clean energy (in which case NASA and the pentagon wouldn't be the right places to look), he'd probably be upfront about that too - it'd be just as controversial as the UFO stuff.
Court documents I read a while back named the individual files he deleted - various DLLs needed for windows to boot.

Being skeptical is good and to be encouraged, but he actually confessed with his own mouth. He does not deny his crimes, he denies the impact of them and he denies the justice of the sentence. I would never presume to say he's guilty until proven innocent, but as he has confessed then it is correct to call him guilty.

He did not declare war against the US, but he did attack it at a time when the nation needed to have its military as intact as possible.

I seriously doubt 9-11 had anything at all to do with Gary's motivations, he just had horrendously bad timing. I do believe he was honest in stating he was looking for UFOs.

Looking at the methods he used, it did not take him much skill. I question a great deal his judgement in the way he pulled off the attack as it was essentially a matter of time until he was caught. He was ultimately caught because someone sitting at one of the machines he broke into saw the mouse cursor moving by itself. Someone with more talent would know not to do that, and if graphical interface was needed then there are better alternatives to the commercial (and highly visible in add/remove programs) product he used.

Encryption is nothing to do with it, that merely secures the communications link - it doesn't protect against malicious data being sent over the link.

I don't think his political views are all that relevant, except to say that it is doubtful that he has any islamic sympathies. He seems unlikely to have an ulterior motive beyond what he has publically stated, though I would not dismiss this idea completely.

What we do know is that he does believe in alien life visiting earth and he does believe the US government is covering it up. That belief is perfectly fine for him to hold, but it does not excuse his actions.

He may not have declared a violent intent toward the government in the normal sense of the word, but he did declare malicious intent - "I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels".

If clean energy is found, that's great - but absolutely nothing at all to do with this case at all. In my view, as regards autism rights, he should be given precisely the same treatment an NT would receive. Only at the sentencing phase should there be possible considerations as to his safety in prison.

I do not believe that he should be exposed to physical danger against his person for his none-violent crimes, but I do believe that he deserves imprisonment. Undoubtedly he will be seen as a celebrity for many years to come, and personally I do find that sad.

Admittedly though, I do quite admire Kevin Mitnick for the way in which he has turned his life around and used his knowledge constructively. My admiration though does not mean I would have joined the "free mitnick" crowd back in the 80s if I had been of age back then - nor would I give the man a pat on the back for his crimes.

The same goes for Gary McKinnon - but less so, as to be honest I resent his using his diagnosis like he is, and I also resent the way in which he is being portrayed as some kind of oppressed genius.

For the record, I have done similar things, which while low level are just as illegal. I deeply regret doing them even where I strove not to cause direct harm. One thing I would never have dreamt of doing in my rebellious period is breaking into and then trashing any system on which lives could depend. The absolute worst I have ever done is to knock my high school's network temporarily offline, and I was justly punished for my stupidity. To break into a military system or even a hospital and disable it would have required no regard for human safety.

I can think of plenty of people who have done dumb things in their youth, some deeply criminal, and who have learnt from their mistakes. The ones I can now respect never crossed the boundary into risking actual danger to people's lives - that's a line that is inexcusable to cross. Curiosity and childish behaviour can be forgiven, endangering lives can't be.

Thanks

This is truly the most important aspect of the case that we should be concerned with. In my view, it is only relevant in the sentencing phase when the question of whether he would be more vulnerable in prison is considered.

As stated in the court documents, multiple DLL files required to boot were deleted. Doing this would take no great skill at all once connected to the machines. If you want to see what I mean, try this on a spare computer (and I emphasise spare - you'll need an OS reinstall after doing this) running windows:

Go to "my computer", click C:\ and then windows
Click System
Delete all the files you can
Reboot

See if it still boots up.

As Gary already had access to the graphical interface (this is how he was caught as I stated above - someone sitting there could see the mouse cursor moving by itself), doing this would be absolutely trivial. Unless you wish to make the claim that the prosecution actually falsified evidence, the conclusion is very clear.

?

That's why I love the OpenBSD approach so much - they fix even obscure potential security holes such as "if you're using this particular hardware driver and configure it with this particular setting then potentially there might be a possibility of a buffer overflow in certain situations that can be induced by someone with existing low privilege access to the machine" and do regular code audits.

One of the main problems with information security is not revealing all the information and believing in "security through obscurity". It is vastly better to reveal absolutely every detail of your system, and only then after the world has seen all the details can you be confident it's truly secure.

THANK YOU!

No such thing as "truly secure." If there was, cyber-crime would not exist. No system can be perfectly secure as long as there are Gary McKinnons out there. And the Gary Mckinnons of the world are fiendishly prolific, fiendishly creative, fiendishly elusive...

What if they are aliens?

I have as much proof of aliens as I do of angels ...

I have experienced God directly.  As for Angels and Aliens, I do not have the direct experience that would allow me to comment intelligently.  The experience of God is most important, so I will let this issue rest.

I just think that we should go after the real cyberterrorists in China and Russia, and leave Gary alone.

That's a good song.  Who knew he was so talented?  Can't think why the FBI's so interested in him when there's larger fish to fry out there.

Dill means an idiot, local slang. The local IT guys go through the security and ask what if questions all the time. In fact the Uni I am at dedicates tons of cash and research to internet/programme security. They are very proactive here. hey hey I get priveldges to use the super computing facilities next year. We use them to model stuff, except the last guy crashed it doing a 3D chemical model, that went down real well. IT guys running all directions.

That reminds me of the policeman who stopped a little old lady in her VW on the way to church.  
"But I wasn't speeding, officer."
"No, but you're the only one I could catch."
Alison

I would like to add my own "amen" to these points.  I think that in interaction with the police and legal system, that aspies are at a distinct disadvantage.   Particularly since we are inclined to take things like the rights and responsibilities of a citizen literally.   For instance,
-- When the police say that they want our "cooperation" they don't mean "them and us working together" (co = together, operation = to work)  rather they want us to work for them and do what they say.  That is subordination, not cooperation!
-- when they arrest the innocent and say ".... if you cannot afford a lawyer one will be appointed for you"  and then ask "Do you understand these rights" by "afford" they mean "after we wreck you life by requiring you to expend any money or property you own" so that if you win you still lose.
-- In the U.S. it is legal for police to lie to suspects but a crime for a suspect to lie to the police.  (Why would you ever even talk to the police in such a lopsided situation ?)
-- With "plea bargaining" as practiced in the U.S.  The accused can expect to be charged with a huge list of crimes dreamed up in the wildest imagination of the state's attourney as a threat to coerce a guilty plea from an innocent person or a person guilty of a much much lesser infraction.
etc.

I expect it will be a grave miscarriage of justice if McKinnon is extradited and tried in the U.S. and it will be to the shame of the British nation that it was allowed to happen.  The U.S. and any other nation has no right to claim extraterritorial status of our laws and subject foreign citizens to penalties that simply don't apply in their own countries.  I am ashamed of my own nations actions in this matter as they attempt to "cover the a** (a**e)" of the incompetents who maintained the computer system that McKinnon hacked.

I created that question to prove my point. I liked the responses. But I see your point but I see this as different. No one made him hack into the computer system. He made himself do it, no one threatened him to or blackmailed him to nor was any gun pointed to his head to do it.

The other stuff you mentioned was different. I think everyone should have those rights if they have those difficulties, aspie or not.

I strongly disagree that there is discrimination against Autists within the criminal justice system. 99% of the time  it is not known that a person is Autistic. When an officer places you under arrest if you make any kind of move to pull away, even if you are 90 years old it is still considered resistance. You must submit. That is a fact. I dont like it ,no one does.

Your defence can use a DX  of Autism in court, but it only suggests diminished capacity to the jury. As a result you may end up in a mental institution.


By the by, in american police academies here in the states, police are not taught that their mission is to Serve and Protect,anymore. Instead they are drilled that they are here to supervise. All of us.

So instead of asking for real justice just for the Autist, we should be asking for real and equal justice for all.

As for Gary that has already been discussed to death here. Yeah he is guilty and I have sympathy, but he must do his time either here, or in the UK. Get it over with, so he can get on with his life.

Ok, first I'm not trying to say that a police officer finds out you're autistic and then decides to give you a hard time.  I'm saying he responds to your characteristics, whether or not you are aware of the diagnosis.  Some police forces in the UK have cottoned on to this now, and recruits are being trained to consider that someone may have autism.  I guess there wouldn't be a need to do that if a) we had better access to diagnosis, b) the police weren't inclined to behave in a bullying fashion in the first place.

As far as touch sensitivity is concerned, if you put your hand in a fire, you instinctually react to remove it.  The same if you are touch sensitive.  That should be considered.

A dx does not automatically infer diminished responsibility, unless the specific circumstances relate to it.  It may be considered a mitigating factor in certain cases, but that is different to implying diminished responsibility.  What a dx absolutely MUST mean is that an individual is fairly and sensitively treated, and that appropriate adjustments are made to ensure that he/she has the same ACCESS to proper justice as everyone else would have.

Similar things have happened to us, as well.  I think for no other reason that that Vernu is black.  Once we were stopped by police for driving too slowly!

And back in the 1980's when we were first going out together, we'd go to the outskirts of the airport and watch the planes coming in (Vernu has an obsession with planes, similar to a 'train-spotter' -- methinks there is a bit of Aspie in him somewhere!)  We had to stop because airport security would come out to the fenceline and warn us off.  Nowadays, they'd probably taser us both before asking questions.

He's also been stopped because he likes to wear driving gloves as well.  His palms are quite sensitive and tend to get sore if he grips the steering wheel for too long with just bare skin.  He was told that he needed to get a medical certificate stating that!  I told the officer I wanted to see where in the law that was written down and he got very stroppy with me and told me I was a trouble-maker.  I responded that most people told me that when I openly disagreed with them for their illogical comments.  He then took my driving license and checked it over the radio.  Poor man must have been *soooo* disappointed to see that I have a 35 year spotless driving record!  I could see he really wanted to get me on something!

Alison

Ummmmm, speaking of medical braclets, should there be one for those on the spectrum,stating our DX not only for medical personnel but for law enforcement also. HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

Interesting point.  I wonder how many undiagnosed Aspies (I believe there's many more of us that fly under the radar than is usually thought) are in prison because they weren't charismatic enough to sway the jury?    
Alison

In the UK, the National Autistic Society provide Autism Alert cards... I have one myself.  There is an information leaflet inside, and one half of it is devoted to giving the police and legal services essential information.  Although as one person pointed out on another forum, these are kept in your pocket, and aren't immediately obvious, which can cause problems.  If a bracelet was available, I'd wear one without a doubt.

Totally... I think there's a good case for saying that both un-dx'd and dx'd aspies get a rough deal in jury trials.

Autism Alert cards are voluntary, and I guess bracelets would be too... at least I hope so!!  For sure, a lot of people wouldn't want to wear one, and wouldn't necessarily have any reason to.  But I've gotten into a few situations with public meltdowns or general hospital admissions where a bracelet would have come in handy for me.  It would be nice to have the option.

I'd not heard of that before, but would be interested to find out if anyone knows...

That kinda makes one wonder - isn't the point of a medalert bracelet to inform paramedics etc of anything they need to know in case you're actually unconcious? Stuff like allergies, diabetes, or in my case (well, not yet - keep meaning to get one) "in case of death cool head with ice, inject heparin, maintain CPR and call this number".

Why would "this person is autistic" be relevant to medical treatment if you're unconcious?

I would be using it for informing law enforcement my self. There wouldnt be enough room on there for all the info you would want on there.

The dog tag would come in handy for a child I believe as would a braclet if they were lost,etc.


By the by , good luck with that after death thing,hope it works for you.  Myself....I'm out of here.  

Er, isn't the assumption: Innocent until proven guilty?
Alison

The copycats are coming, the copycats are coming!

I always find conspiracy theories, where the various governments are believed to be "hiding" things from us, to be touching in the amount of trust it's citizenry has in government intelligence: after working within various government departments for most of my adult life, I don't have such a high opinion of governments, sadly.  I tend to believe that the majority of governments world-wide are full of people who can't find their @ss with both hands and a torch gripped between their teeth.  But as I say, it's nice that so many people think they ARE smart enough to hide things from us.  
Alison

NICE? That they not only have their own self-esteem but ours too?

This is news to me. What did he reveal?

That the organizations he hacked into needed better security.
Alison