You saw the final report? Just how did you come to this conclusion and
knowing all the facts? Both of you are really amazingly stupid and
prejudicial. According to our laws we have the presumption of innocence
until proven otherwise but please, don't let the Constitution get in
On Friday, August 26, 2016 at 11:59:17 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
Says who? The car can be registered to his wife, mother, GF or a
leasing company. And even if they pulled his drivers license, how
do you know what they put or don't put on a driver's license in
Exactly, here in Ontario, Canada, the only medical information on my
license is whether I need glasses to drive. I do wear glasses, but that
box is not checked as my eyesight has not been deemed bad enough, but do
not get me to read road signs without them. There is no spot for other
It's totally possible the cop didn't have that information, but when the
man got out of his car and began using sign language, that should have
been a gigantic HINT to the cops he was deaf.
LE are supposed to be trained to deal with the public and all sorts of
situations. What ever happened to "assessing the situation and
communicating with the public"??
You saw it? You know the lighting was good? The signing could be
I understand from the link you posted he was afraid of the police so I
would have thought he would take even more precaution or sought help to
find out exactly what to do.
I wasn't there, and it doesn't matter if the signing could be
interpreted by the officer or not. If the officer couldn't communicate
with the man, he should have found someone who could.
Hindsight is better than foresight? It's easy to say what the "right"
response should have been from the deaf man, but many people simply
don't understand deaf people or why they respond the way they do. They
think deaf people must be stupid if they don't respond like a hearing
person would, or they don't respond logically.
One thing I've noticed is that totally deaf people are way more animated
when they communicate - waving of the arms along with facial and body
expression. Just an observation.
You are making an assumption that he did not understand sign language.
He may not have seen enough to know it was that and not someone flailing
his arms in anger. Don't draw a conclusion on your supposition.
Just as it is easy for you to say what the police response should have
been. Unless you witnessed it or saw video, you have no idea what
You seem to want to assess a situation you did not see. Try working
from facts before drawing conclusions.
The man may have wanted to go to a safe place before stopping, and being
hearing impaired could have been a major insecurity for him and his
wanting to go to a familiar and safe place. So, heading home and
stopping there was a logical response for someone with his disability.
I haven't heard anything about him leading some high speed chase. He
simply drove until he got home. It makes sense for him to do that with
I don't know many people who don't recognize sign language. They may
not understand it, but it's obvious it's sign language.
I tend to think the cop was just jumpy and overreacted, again.
On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 22:50:03 -0500, Muggles wrote:
I strongly disagree. If he's licensed to drive he should understand that
when the police want you to stop, you do so at the first 'safe place'.
This does not mean your home, it means the first place it is safe to
stop. If you're not in a construction zone or the middle of a bridge or
tunnel, it means the shoulder of the roadway.
If the guy was on vacation in Florida, would he expect to drive 800
miles instead of eight?
His diability might have made him take a bit longer to notice he's being
followed by the police. But there is no disability that allows one to
drive all the way home. Someone who engages in a low speed chase is
either impaired, deranged, or OJ Simpson.
I'm not so sure about that. He had someone who failed to pull over. The
most likely explanation is someone impaired, deranged, or engaged in a
I feel pity for the deaf man, but the first sign language he should have
used with a reasonable expectation to be understood by police is the
universal 'hands up - don't shoot'. Even illiterate impaired gang
bangers understand that.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.