Discrimination.

[OrlithNightfire]

This might be a hot topic. So I apologise.

There was an incident at a site recently of a person with disabilities being banned. 

This person claims it was discrimination. But he was acting aggressive/dangerous. 

Where is the line drawn? I know most sites caters as far as it can for disabilities/ neurodivergent players.

Is it Still discrimination when it's dangers for the person and those around them?

Again sorry if this is a hot topic and I don't want to offend anyone.

Thanks for reading

Orlith

 

[Tommikka]

This might be a hot topic. So I apologise.

There was an incident at a site recently of a person with disabilities being banned. 

This person claims it was discrimination. But he was acting aggressive/dangerous. 

Where is the line drawn? I know most sites caters as far as it can for disabilities/ neurodivergent players.

Is it Still discrimination when it's dangers for the person and those around them?

Again sorry if this is a hot topic and I don't want to offend anyone.

Thanks for reading

Orlith

It would entirely depend on the circumstances.

Discrimination is covered by the Equality Act, and applies to protected characteristics which include disability.

If they were banned for being disabled then that would be discrimination 

If banned for their actions as an individual then that would not be discrimination 

But if banned as an individual, for their actions which are a result of their ability then that may or may not be discrimination - and can come down to what is reasonable.

 

[Tackle]

Unfortunately it's all too easy these days for a wrongdoer to scream "foul", & Unfortunately I've known a few disabled people, some since childhood, that will play on this, in much the same way that some use the race card to their advantage, which again I've witnessed firsthand, in one job in particular. 

@OrlithNightfire , if you personally witnessed his poor behaviour, theres not much more to discuss, he went against site rules & got banned, end of.

 

[Darkmikey22]

If the guy was acting dangerous. Then hats off the the site for actually dealing with it. 

Just because they're disabled, doesn't give them the right to endanger others. And site owner was well within his rights. 

I get tired of seeing/hearing this. 

I once worked with a black lad. Who was always on his phone, was always late back from break. Was even rude to everyone like the world owed him something. And was off sick nearly every other week. Yet when he was eventually sacked. He tried to take the company to court, claiming the discrimination/race card. 

Luckily they saw straight through it. But it's the fact they try!.... 

Saw it only a few weeks back also, with a disabled person. Expecting a restaurant to pretty much kick out an already paying customer, just so they can get a table. Then threw a fit when was told to wait like everyone else. 

I'm all for equality, better working conditions and all that jazz. 

But when they get the equality and treaded the same as every other normal person, they kick off like right karens. 

and people ever give into these people or atleast give them airtime. 

Worlds gone mad  these days. 

 

[Dan Robinson]

If there's a tangible danger to others then someone's disability or neuro divergency / whatever is irrelevant.  I'm in a mixed race marriage, I'm somewhere on "the" spectrum, I have three nephews anchoring said spectrum to the ground, my teenager is mixed raced (and currently hating it) and I think our gay friend contingent is just about offset by my devout muslim workforce.....  So I like to think my worldview is pretty balanced.

That being said....   We spend too much time in this world worrying about those differences, when really we should all be treated with the same consideration and respect as we wish to have.  Therefore, if you're one of those that should be seen next Tuesday, then you should be treated thusly.  

I remember coming of age in the 90's and caring more about people being nice to one another than worrying about their situation.   Airsoft sites need to worry about people's eyeballs more than they do the ability to walk, think, self identify... I think that is probably how society should look at things too.

 

[Galvatron]

As said, if the player's behaviour was aggressive or dangerous, that is more than adequate grounds to them being banned. Being ND/disabled would be completely incidental so no discrimination is at play.

Any self-respecting site will say safety comes first and if anyone, be they ND, NT, disabled or "able-bodied", behaves in a manner deemed dangerous or otherwise against the site's rules, that's on them to deal with the consequences.

On a somewhat related note, someone posted a negative review of a site saying its staff were unwelcoming and that his experience fell short of expectations. It was vaguely written without specific examples of what he didn't like. It transpired that he wrote it out of spite because he was asked to leave for ignoring multiple safety warnings. I think he was Romanian but I very much doubt that it even crossed the minds of the staff who asked him to leave.

 

[OrlithNightfire]

I mean my site is awesome. They bend over backwards to help include people. Even doing private games for parents oh high spectrum neuro, in small groups so they can play. If a group plays on a normal game day, one of the marshal's shadows to make sure they are safe if they have a episode due to it being too much. This marshal often play marshals so they can stay with them but not give away their location away with a high vis.

Just hurt to hear person saying they would sue on discrimination act because they were band as they didn't ask to be this way. Didn't want this awesome site say shut down or get a bad rep for not including people. 

 

[Dan Robinson]

I mean my site is awesome. They bend over backwards to help include people. Even doing private games for parents oh high spectrum neuro, in small groups so they can play. If a group plays on a normal game day, one of the marshal's shadows to make sure they are safe if they have a episode due to it being too much. This marshal often play marshals so they can stay with them but not give away their location away with a high vis.

Just hurt to hear person saying they would sue on discrimination act because they were band as they didn't ask to be this way. Didn't want this awesome site say shut down or get a bad rep for not including people. 

We have a (now somewhat diverted) thread running about marshals and body cameras.  I don';t think this situation was considered in our ramblings.  Sounds like this person is just being an attention seeker which ruins everything for everyone - especially if there are outlets catering specifically for their situation.

 

[Pseudotectonic]

The line is drawn at the site's duty to make "reasonable adjustments" under Equality Act.

To sue for discrimination the claimant will have to convince the court that there was a >51% probability that "failure of reasonable adjustment" had occurred, but because you cannot reasonably adjust the site rules to allow any aggressive behaviour to happen and compromise safety of others, it is pretty much impossible that such a claim would succeed.

It is not discrimination to not adjust the site rules for a disabled person if they are being a safety risk to themselves or others as it is going to "fundamentally alter the nature of the service".

 

[Galvatron]

I mean my site is awesome. They bend over backwards to help include people. Even doing private games for parents oh high spectrum neuro, in small groups so they can play. If a group plays on a normal game day, one of the marshal's shadows to make sure they are safe if they have a episode due to it being too much. This marshal often play marshals so they can stay with them but not give away their location away with a high vis.

Just hurt to hear person saying they would sue on discrimination act because they were band as they didn't ask to be this way. Didn't want this awesome site say shut down or get a bad rep for not including people. 

Anyone can sue on any grounds but the question is whether there's a case.

The fact that the site you play at has games specially for ND players and that there is a precedent of such players playing among NT players on normal game days would be a compelling argument that the banned player was banned because of their actions, not their condition.

 

[Cannonfodder]

If the player was acting aggressively or dangerously then give them the boot as the site had a duty of care towards all players, if their behaviour had the site not acted and the person's actions led to someone getting hurt then the site would've been in serious trouble.

As the site is happy to cater for those with disabilities it sounds to me like the banned player is trying to use their disabilities as an excuse to act like a cunt.

 

[rj1986]

IMO safety trumps disability.

You can be accommodating as possible but sometimes places have to say no.

Im 17.5 stone, and too heavy to do skydiving. But I’m not going to kick up a fuss and then go splat into a puddle. If you’ve got no arms, you can’t race in F1 as you can’t get out the car if it catches on fire.

Similarly, if this person was having an episode or not able to control what they were doing (widespread generalisation) that put other players at risk - if that’s game rules like ignoring MEDs or more real life and getting physical with other players - then for the safety of other people then they should be banned.

Playing the disabled card could just be a dick mood. Same way Tyson Fury and Joe Marler always act like dicks then go “muh mental health”

 

[Cannonfodder]

You can be accommodating as possible but sometimes places have to say no.

My son has autism and ADHD and as much as I'd love to bring him to a game for some father son pew time it's not going to happen as I know he doesn't have the best impulse control, even with meds, so I'm not going to put his or other people's safety at risk for our entertainment

 

[Rogerborg]

Ditto, my autistic son showed some mild interest in airsoft sniping, but we determined that the reality of the shouting, bangs and ouchies wouldn't work out well for him.

I mean my site is awesome. They bend over backwards to help include people. Even doing private games for parents oh high spectrum neuro, in small groups so they can play. If a group plays on a normal game day, one of the marshal's shadows to make sure they are safe if they have a episode due to it being too much.

This is genuinely great to hear, and I fully commend them for doing it.  However, I'm unsurprised that it's gone wrong for them.

People often threaten to "sue" without the first idea of what that means, or what their cause of action would be.  In this case, it sounds like the site has more than demonstrated their Equality Act Section 20 duty to make reasonable adjustments for disability.  Tolerating dangerous behaviour can't be "reasonable" though, as they also have a duty of care to everybody else there.

Sad, but reality doesn't always allow for a win-win.

 

[mrfoxhound]

i know of the incident talked about , was due to over shooting and shooting people after games ended/ after calling hit, person has disability's and was using them as an excuse went on a trayed on facebook and instergram , trying to prove his Innocent, but made the situation worse , then deleted  his face book and youtube videos   

 

[Jez_Armstrong]

was due to over shooting and shooting people after games ended/ after calling hit

I mean, 80% of airsofters also do this ?

 

[Tackle]

I mean, 80% of airsofters also do this ?

Lol yep, but if he'd taken a telling off & stopped being a bellend, he probably wouldn't have got banned.

That's the difference between those of us regular people who can get carried away in the excitement of the "heat of battle"?, & the ever-growing masses of the self entitled who can't accept they could possibly be wrong, whether it's acting like a cnut at an airsoft site or discussing how many genders there are ?

View attachment 127114

 

[SheriffHD]

Okay, so controversial topic.

I'm assuming this persons disability is something like ASC (not allowed refer to it as a spectrum now, which in itself is silly as there's a clear difference between functioning and non functioning imho)

Anywho, the biggest disservice believe it or not for those with ASC that you can do, is to treat them any different than regular folk. (Applies to what we would call functioning ones)

So, this person had to be shown that what they did was wrong and banning them because of their actions puts people at risk is fair and reasonable. It's not discrimination to do.

In terms of other disabilities - well, last year at driver wood there was a guy in a wheel chair (running) an LMG and other than the poor bastard getting overshot because he cant both keep hand in the air and wheel himself back to spawn. Airsofters will generally accept every one due to one simple reason. Don't matter what you look like, what you believe in, or what's wrong with you.....we will happily shoot you without hesitation.

 

[Guinebait]

I am fully aware of whom you speak of. This particular player often uses his disabilities to try to win arguements and get his own way. Has been banned from multiple sights for safety issues and uses legal action threats constantly. It's not discrimination as this individual has literally been given chance after chance before being banned. And other player would have been automatically removed and banned without hesitation. If anything they were given more leeway due to their existing conditions. My brother has similar disabilities and I won't bring him along to matches due to his lack of control if he becomes triggered. Safety is priority especially when you can lose an eye and those Airsoft weapons are often heavy enough to knock someone out with. 

 

[OrlithNightfire]

Please don't start throwing names out. No its not this person you speak of, don't know them. 

I don't want this thread to turn into a witch hunt. It was a genuine question about whats going on.