Cameron thinks some of us are.
Yep, really, that misbegotten fuckwit Cameron wants to remove benefits from people considered to be complicit in their own disability. Just how many classifications are there where that might be considered an appropriate definition (appropriate to Numbnuts, of course, not to sane people), beyond the addicts, alcoholics and the obese who seem to get up his nose the most (but disability can make you fat, you dumb prick (enforced inactivity and/or meds), and you’re not exactly sylph-like!). After all, many activities carry a higher than normal level of risk, so if we come unstuck, are we to blame? Consider:-
People injured in car crashes – your fault; if you hadn’t been driving it wouldn’t have happened.
Cyclists trashed by blind motorists – same logic
Bikers, creamed and crippled by their own over-ambition – yep, you too
Mountaineers, hill walkers, ramblers, backpackers, climbers, cavers, permanently injured while taking part in their chosen pastime – ditto
In almost any injury-related disability, it could be spun to make the disabled person wholly or partly complicit in their own disability – if you hadn’t been doing whatever it was, it wouldn’t have happened. You put yourself, willingly, in harm’s way. While true, in some cases, at least, it’s also the most egregious bullshit to try to spin it in that way, but just give the bugger time!
Much of my own disability (in addition to St.4 COPD and Cl.4 heart failure), is a direct result of being struck by lightning while out walking in the hills of North Wales.
Does that make it my own fault in whatever despicable, bigoted, morass lurks between Cameron’s ears?
After all, I willingly put myself in a position where that risk was considerably higher than it would be, say, in the High Street.
Just a thought . . .