![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conuly
Remember the woman who sends evidence about people who illegally park in handicapped spots?
Donovan McNabb and Jeremiah Trotter were found guilty of parking in handicapped spots. Their vehicles were photographed by Mary Ann Cottrell, who has made it her business to police the handicapped spots. I would suggest Ms. Cottrell look in the mirror before she takes another photo.
She has a handicapped license due to her caring for an adult child with autism. An individual with autism has complete mobility, and it is not necessary for them to use handicapped parking. Let those who are physically impaired use the spots, not Ms. Cottrell.
1. Stop it with the asinine phrase "adult child with autism". Just quit it.
2. You and I have no evidence that Ms. Cottrell's daughter does not, in fact, have any physical impairment.
3. Even if she did, she may still have a perfectly valid reason for using the handicapped spot - for example, if she gets lost very easily, as some people (me) do, due (I believe) to a spatial agnosia and bad sense of direction. That's for the courts to decide.
3.5 Which they already did, didn' they?
Shouldn't Ms. Cottrell be working or taking care of her handicapped kid instead of stalking the citizens of New Jersey?
I guess Ms. Cottrell didn't watch the Eagles play last season. Otherwise she would agree that McNabb definitely deserved a handicapped spot.
Humor as a defense mechanism. Never seen that one before.
Why would Donovan be so foolish as to contest a ticket for parking in a handicapped space?
He's a millionaire making more than enough to pay such a fine with the wages of an hour. Yet he brings a well-paid lawyer in to fight this fine. Why? Teammate Jeremiah Trotter isn't much better.
Exactly. He's just making himself look bad. *nodnodnod*
Three letters, two of which aren't worth the paper they're virtually printed on. *le sigh*
On a related note, about how many children under six do you have to have before a presumably non-disabling pregnancy justifies taking the handicapped spot? I'm not sure, but I think it *must* be more than just two.
Donovan McNabb and Jeremiah Trotter were found guilty of parking in handicapped spots. Their vehicles were photographed by Mary Ann Cottrell, who has made it her business to police the handicapped spots. I would suggest Ms. Cottrell look in the mirror before she takes another photo.
She has a handicapped license due to her caring for an adult child with autism. An individual with autism has complete mobility, and it is not necessary for them to use handicapped parking. Let those who are physically impaired use the spots, not Ms. Cottrell.
1. Stop it with the asinine phrase "adult child with autism". Just quit it.
2. You and I have no evidence that Ms. Cottrell's daughter does not, in fact, have any physical impairment.
3. Even if she did, she may still have a perfectly valid reason for using the handicapped spot - for example, if she gets lost very easily, as some people (me) do, due (I believe) to a spatial agnosia and bad sense of direction. That's for the courts to decide.
3.5 Which they already did, didn' they?
Shouldn't Ms. Cottrell be working or taking care of her handicapped kid instead of stalking the citizens of New Jersey?
I guess Ms. Cottrell didn't watch the Eagles play last season. Otherwise she would agree that McNabb definitely deserved a handicapped spot.
Humor as a defense mechanism. Never seen that one before.
Why would Donovan be so foolish as to contest a ticket for parking in a handicapped space?
He's a millionaire making more than enough to pay such a fine with the wages of an hour. Yet he brings a well-paid lawyer in to fight this fine. Why? Teammate Jeremiah Trotter isn't much better.
Exactly. He's just making himself look bad. *nodnodnod*
Three letters, two of which aren't worth the paper they're virtually printed on. *le sigh*
On a related note, about how many children under six do you have to have before a presumably non-disabling pregnancy justifies taking the handicapped spot? I'm not sure, but I think it *must* be more than just two.
no subject
Date: 2006-04-14 03:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-04-14 03:25 am (UTC)Since there isn't a picture, calling her kid "her autistic child", or even "her autistic daughter" would, for most people, create the image of a child, I assume.
in de nile
Date: 2006-04-14 03:59 am (UTC)Still, the correct reference is "her autistic daughter" - the child has a gender, and 'daughter' is more personal than 'child'. It doesn't require a photo to convey that her daughter is an adult, and the mother is her carer. "adult child" is just lazy.
The politicisation of autism is mind-numbing in it's sheer depth of impersonal grandstanding. The "it can't be our fault" crowd are so keen on it not being their fault that they resort to depersonalising the whole thing. F*&(^*^ers.
I'm a person, not an "autism" or whatever. Perhaps we ought to refer to those people as "in denial", or "with denial", or "has denial"? "Has denial" seems fitting ot me - though perhaps confusing since I'd be using it to refer to the people who are fixated on claiming everyone else is in denial.
"The reporter with denial", "her father, who has denial", "I may be autistic, but I don't have denial" ...