My Introduction Was Requested By PPK

[EquiisSavant]

How dare anyone ever disagree with a severely autistic person???  :lol:

You do realise that mosr of us here are autistic too? Yes we might not have the communication problems that YOU have, but that does not mean that our lives are loads better than yours, or that you are in any way entitled to special treatment by us just becuase you're an autistic savant.

Did I ever complain that anyone was disagreeing with me ? My problem was with receiving only unworkable suggestions, and when I said they were not really applicable and were unworkable for a locked-in autistic in an effort to elicit more creative and possibly effective solutions that had not up to that point been mentioned, a bar room brawl ensued ...

And I am still not re-instated to my doctor !!!

[EquiisSavant]

because if it is and you make a post without saying the court case result was based on autism discrimination that violated all of the above definitional rules, then you have only told 1/2 the truth -- and half-truths can be legally actionable as defamation -- even to a public figure. Given your scholarly efforts to dig up the rule of law, I am sure that while you or others might like to tell me to go fuck myself or call my savant autism a faggot, you would not necessarily cross the line into a reckless defamation that is not protected speech under the First Amendment. Since I am rather enjoying the skills of the debaters here, I'll give your the benefit of the doubt !!!

omg are you going to sue me?

I think you have more to worry about that tweater over there on the Twitter autism column who goes under the moniker "whocanisue." When I sue, I just do it. We, in the united States, have a purely First Amendment right to petition our courts (sue). Some of the autistic and Aspie Founding Fathers saw to it. You have a problem with the rule of law ?

[Adam]

when I said they were not really applicable and were unworkable for a locked-in autistic in an effort to elicit more creative and possibly effective solutions that had not up to that point been mentioned

Except this is not what you said. If that's what you'd said then no one would have had a problem with you. You went all "I really don't think you understand... you've obviously never been through what I've been through... I'm a poor autistic savant... you're much higher functioning than me, lucky you..." etc etc etc


You're no better than anyone else here

[Adam]

And I am still not re-instated to my doctor !!!

And what do you expect us to do about that?

Seriously, what are you here for?

[EquiisSavant]

when I said they were not really applicable and were unworkable for a locked-in autistic in an effort to elicit more creative and possibly effective solutions that had not up to that point been mentioned

Except this is not what you said. If that's what you'd said then no one would have had a problem with you. You went all "I really don't think you understand... you've obviously never been through what I've been through... I'm a poor autistic savant... you're much higher functioning than me, lucky you..." etc etc etc


You're no better than anyone else here

I have severe autism communication deficits !!! I told all of you that when I was invited to Introduce myself.

[EquiisSavant]

And I am still not re-instated to my doctor !!!

And what do you expect us to do about that?

Seriously, what are you here for?

My feelings and emotions about my doctor were part of my Introduction, since I own my feelings/emotions. But if some here don't own their feelings/emotions, I am just wondering if there is any help for you ?   

[Adam]

What are you talking about?

You do not have autism

[EquiisSavant]

I have to go ride my autism horse now. I am trying to re-take the transferences my doctor hijacked from my horse and give them back, so I can share my innermost feelings and emotions with my autism horse again. But, it hasn't been working -- as mentioned, the transferences my doctor's psychiatry/psychotherapy created were VERY strong.

[EquiisSavant]

What are you talking about?

You do not have autism

I have a DX of high functioning autism with savant abilities in art and the law -- res judicata, facts adjudicated in April 09 by USBJ K. Rodney May by his act of providing me CART realtime in his courtroom.

Unless you have a second opinion PET scan and autism tests and other autism diagnostics on me from my doctor -- who ran off and abandoned me as his patient after he tried to kiss me, your statement is recklessly defamatory.

THAT's 'what I'm talking about.'

But, since no one has any solution for getting me reinstated to my doctor, in terms of the autism DX, you will just have to DEAL with it !!

[P7PSP]

Thx PPK for sharing  your unresearched comments and opinions in the thought-in-process phase of your thinking process.

And how much research did you bother putting into accusing me of being a Federal cop?

I do have a cite for the 45 M figure, and while I also was skeptical it might be on the high side, it nevertheless is a posted statistic floating around out there in the autism World. But, it is also important to note that US government has no contrary figure to propose, since they have not undertaken a real count of the numbers of adults with autism in the U.S., and not in Florida, either. I will try to find the cite.

I would like to see that. With numbers as high as that I doubt there would be so many aspies/auties who state they haven't met other aspies posting @ zOMG Aspies, Intensity Squared and WP. I remain highly skeptical.

Also, when you are assigning weight to your assumptions about my so-called "strategy" choices of where to litigate, you may want to shift your paradigm a bit to the features of locked in autism, since I purely litigated where I was getting ANY even the remotest amount of autism access help -- even where it fell through before a case was complete, to try to overcome the autism communication barriers existing in all these courts. In sum, it was not about faulty "strategic" judgment call; it was about whether or not the particular court had built ramps and an autism entrance to the courthouse and autism access in their clerk's offices and courtrooms in paperless, telephone-less, Internet computer real time.

It's your time and it was you the Court mentioned as being known locally for filing frivilous suits. Being known for that will tend to impugn your credibility.

If you can't get in through the door of the courthouse -- there is a MAJOR lack of Access to the Court-Due Process-Equal Protection problem (and as btw CA anf FL, add: the Privileges and Immunities clause).    

Sure, but because you can try to make a disability rights case out of an $80 traffic ticket doesn't necessarily mean that you should. The Court seemed unenthusiastic and unsympathetic to your appeal in that case.

[Callaway]

Since you know a lot about the law even if you aren't an attorney, I wonder if I could ask you your opinion about the law, EquiisSavant?

My friend's young teenage son has AS.  He was out riding his bike one day, when a bully who had bullied him before told him that he had to give him his bike "or else".

Fearing for his personal safety, her son got off the bike and the bully took it.  Then he walked home and told his parents what had happened and they took him to the police station to make a complaint.  The police said that there was nothing they could do even though her son could identify the bully because her son voluntarily gave the bullly his bike.

Were the police correct in their assessment, or did the bully steal the bike?  

To make it even worse, they later drove by the bully's house, saw the bike in his yard and took it back.  When the police called them to follow up and they told them about this, the police said that they could be the ones who got into trouble for taking the bike back, not the bully bike thief.

[TheoK]

Once again it sounds like Swedish cops. Makes me very disappointed.

[EquiisSavant]

Since you know a lot about the law even if you aren't an attorney, I wonder if I could ask you your opinion about the law, EquiisSavant?

My friend's young teenage son has AS.  He was out riding his bike one day, when a bully who had bullied him before told him that he had to give him his bike "or else".

Fearing for his personal safety, her son got off the bike and the bully took it.  Then he walked home and told his parents what had happened and they took him to the police station to make a complaint.  The police said that there was nothing they could do even though her son could identify the bully because her son voluntarily gave the bullly his bike.

Were the police correct in their assessment, or did the bully steal the bike?  

To make it even worse, they later drove by the bully's house, saw the bike in his yard and took it back.  When the police called them to follow up and they told them about this, the police said that they could be the ones who got into trouble for taking the bike back, not the bully bike thief.

Callaway, I don't give legal advice. I'm not a licensed lawyer.

[EquiisSavant]

Thx PPK for sharing  your unresearched comments and opinions in the thought-in-process phase of your thinking process.

And how much research did you bother putting into accusing me of being a Federal cop?

I do have a cite for the 45 M figure, and while I also was skeptical it might be on the high side, it nevertheless is a posted statistic floating around out there in the autism World. But, it is also important to note that US government has no contrary figure to propose, since they have not undertaken a real count of the numbers of adults with autism in the U.S., and not in Florida, either. I will try to find the cite.

I would like to see that. With numbers as high as that I doubt there would be so many aspies/auties who state they haven't met other aspies posting @ zOMG Aspies, Intensity Squared and WP. I remain highly skeptical.

Also, when you are assigning weight to your assumptions about my so-called "strategy" choices of where to litigate, you may want to shift your paradigm a bit to the features of locked in autism, since I purely litigated where I was getting ANY even the remotest amount of autism access help -- even where it fell through before a case was complete, to try to overcome the autism communication barriers existing in all these courts. In sum, it was not about faulty "strategic" judgment call; it was about whether or not the particular court had built ramps and an autism entrance to the courthouse and autism access in their clerk's offices and courtrooms in paperless, telephone-less, Internet computer real time.

It's your time and it was you the Court mentioned as being known locally for filing frivilous suits. Being known for that will tend to impugn your credibility.

If you can't get in through the door of the courthouse -- there is a MAJOR lack of Access to the Court-Due Process-Equal Protection problem (and as btw CA anf FL, add: the Privileges and Immunities clause).    

Sure, but because you can try to make a disability rights case out of an $80 traffic ticket doesn't necessarily mean that you should. The Court seemed unenthusiastic and unsympathetic to your appeal in that case.

Glad to hear you call autism faciliated communications access lawsuits "frivolous." Other than my own case, I have never seen any facilicated communication autism case where the locked-out autistic person was forced without the facilicated communication to communicate without a lawyer and language interpreter -- I guess a few grunts, smiles, and odd expressions lets our courts know whatever gibberish comes out of an autistic person's mouth or pen is expected to be "frivolous" because what else can you call autistic mumbo-jumbo you can't understand ? You are a real shining star.

[Callaway]

Since you know a lot about the law even if you aren't an attorney, I wonder if I could ask you your opinion about the law, EquiisSavant?

My friend's young teenage son has AS.  He was out riding his bike one day, when a bully who had bullied him before told him that he had to give him his bike "or else".

Fearing for his personal safety, her son got off the bike and the bully took it.  Then he walked home and told his parents what had happened and they took him to the police station to make a complaint.  The police said that there was nothing they could do even though her son could identify the bully because her son voluntarily gave the bullly his bike.

Were the police correct in their assessment, or did the bully steal the bike?  

To make it even worse, they later drove by the bully's house, saw the bike in his yard and took it back.  When the police called them to follow up and they told them about this, the police said that they could be the ones who got into trouble for taking the bike back, not the bully bike thief.

Callaway, I don't give legal advice. I'm not a licensed lawyer.

I wasn't looking for legal advice.  My friend isn't suing the police department.  I just wanted your opinion as to whether or not the bully stole the bike from my friend's son or if the police were correct that he voluntarily gave it to hm.

I think that by their logic carjackers don't actually steal people's cars, the owners just give them their cars voluntarily when the carjackers order the owners to get out.